Every category where a model named Bugcrowd for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Penetration testing as a service	Security operations	0%	23 of 76	30%	10	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Bugcrowd yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Bugcrowd across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	2	3
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct7 labels1

Paraphrase10 labelsNone

Comparative16 labels4not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative39 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 5 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Top Service: Bugcrowd” GLM 4.7 FlashX · PTaaS · comparative prompt · first choice

“Large-scale, ongoing coverage → bug bounty/crowdsourced (HackerOne, Bugcrowd)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · PTaaS · comparative prompt · alternative

“Similar to HackerOne, offers great entry-level tiers for small businesses.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · PTaaS · budget prompt · alternative

“with Synack and Bugcrowd as strong alternatives” GPT-5.4 mini · PTaaS · paraphrase prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“typically more expensive for enterprise‑scale needs; often better suited to large, complex programs” GLM 4.7 FlashX · PTaaS · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

“Unlike Bug Crowds where you get random hackers, Synack vets its talent rigorously.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · PTaaS · direct prompt · soft negative

“Platforms like HackerOne or Bugcrowd... tester continuity is lower” Qwen 3.7 Flash · PTaaS · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Bugcrowd, over the 39 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Bugcrowd was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Cobalt28 of 3913Not in the top three

Synack24 of 393Not in the top three

HackerOne20 of 391Not in the top three

BreachLock18 of 392Not in the top three

NetSPI14 of 396Not in the top three

Astra Security14 of 394Not in the top three

Bishop Fox13 of 390Not in the top three

Acunetix10 of 392Not in the top three

Intruder8 of 391Not in the top three

Coalfire7 of 391Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Bugcrowd. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 30 of the 39 answers that named Bugcrowd and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

synack.com24

deepstrike.io22

techrepublic.com20

terra.security20

stingrai.io17

underdefense.com17

brightdefense.com10

cybri.com10

getastra.com9

softwaresecured.com9

158 of the 158 domain citations in answers naming Bugcrowd came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

synack.com/blog/best-penetration-testing-companies21

techrepublic.com/article/best-penetration-testing-companies20

terra.security/blog/top-10-penetration-testing-as-a-service-ptaas-providers20

underdefense.com/blog/penetration-testing-services15

deepstrike.io/blog/top-penetration-testing-as-a-service-ptaas12

deepstrike.io/blog/top-penetration-testing-companies11

stingrai.io/blog/best-ptaas-providers-202610

softwaresecured.com/post/top-10-penetration-testing-vendors9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Bugcrowd

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Bugcrowd; a claim can dispute any of them.

Bug Crowds 1

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Bugcrowd's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Bugcrowd, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at bugcrowd.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.