Burp Suite
121Judge labels
3First choices
40Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in DAST for enterprise buyers
Rank 9 of 58 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 18% of its 45 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Burp Suite →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business19 of 53
0%41 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market9 of 58
2%45 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise5 of 54
4%23 labels
criticized challenger
In dast · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Burp Suite 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dynamic application security testing | Developer platform | 2% | 9 of 58 | 18% | 45 | accepted challenger | |
| API security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 29 of 93 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Aikido Security at 12% | |
| Vulnerability management platforms | Security operations | 0% | 30 of 77 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Rapid7 InsightVM at 30% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Burp Suite yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.
By model
How each model treated Burp Suite across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Burp Suite across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
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
Direct16 labels1
Paraphrase11 labels1
Comparative31 labels3not counted in share
Budget-constrained26 labels1
Scale-constrained10 labelsNone
Negative27 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative121 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 7 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.
“commercial tools like Burp Suite Professional and Invicti catch more vulnerability types than open-source alternatives, with Burp Suite achieving ~29% coverage of critical vulnerabilities” MiniMax M2.5 · DAST · comparative prompt · first choice
“I'd generally recommend Burp Suite Professional if you want the best balance of capability, usability, and web-app-focused coverage” GPT-5.4 mini · DAST · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Burp Suite Professional (PortSwigger): Best for manual testing + automated scanning hybrid. Excellent SPA support.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · DAST · negative prompt · first choice
“Burp Suite is the gold standard for manual exploration and validation.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · DAST · comparative prompt · first choice
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.
“The Verdict: Avoid for automated scanning. Use only for manual penetration testing.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · DAST · negative prompt · hard negative
“Burp Suite Enterprise has complex setup and configuration requirements that often need dedicated security expertise” Claude Haiku 4.5 · DAST · negative prompt · soft negative
“Extremely manual and limited automation in the free version; Pro is better but still developer/pentester-focused.” Grok 4.20 · DAST · negative prompt · soft negative
“strong community support and an extensive plugin ecosystem, though it has a steep learning curve and complex UI” Claude Haiku 4.5 · DAST · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Burp Suite, over the 121 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Burp Suite was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Burp Suite, over the 121 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Burp Suite was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Burp Suite. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 112 of the 121 answers that named Burp Suite and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
getastra.com66
beaglesecurity.com57
aikido.dev51
stackhawk.com50
aimultiple.com44
appsecsanta.com44
getautonoma.com39
checkmarx.com36
augmentcode.com35
escape.tech35
No domain is on file for Burp Suite, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Burp Suite stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Burp Suite stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 12,100 a month (“burp suite”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 681 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 9 of 58 in DAST
Segment leader
29%
OWASP ZAP
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 121 answers
- Its own site cited
- No site on file to match
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as Burp Suite
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Burp Suite; a claim can dispute any of them.
Burp Suite Professional 10Burp Suite Enterprise 7Burp Suite Community Edition 6Burp Suite (by PortSwigger) 4Burp Suite Community 2Burp Suite (Community & Pro Editions) 1Burp Suite (Enterprise) 1Burp Suite Community Edition (CE) 1Burp Suite Pro 1Burp Suite Professional / Community 1Burp Suite Professional/Enterprise 1
Follow Burp Suite
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
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 Burp Suite'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 Burp Suite, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Burp Suite by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Burp Suite is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Burp Suite, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.