Every category where a model named CanIPhish 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
Security awareness training	Security operations	0%	14 of 65	0%	7	under 10 labels · led by KnowBe4 at 42%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for CanIPhish 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 CanIPhish across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

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

Direct5 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained16 labels2

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative5 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative32 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 3 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.

“Free phishing simulations, self‑serve | Technical owners who want control and transparent pricing” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Awareness training · budget prompt · alternative

“Best self-serve free simulations - Free tier for phishing simulation testing” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Awareness training · budget prompt · alternative

“Strong free alternatives: CanIPhish (Free forever for up to 10 users)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Awareness training · budget prompt · alternative

“a strong self-serve free phishing-simulation option” GPT-5.4 mini · Awareness training · budget 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as CanIPhish, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CanIPhish was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Hook Security31 of 3216Not in the top three

Wizer31 of 3216Not in the top three

KnowBe427 of 323Not in the top three

Huntress Managed Security Awareness Training17 of 324Not in the top three

Proofpoint ZenGuide7 of 320Not in the top three

SoSafe6 of 321Not in the top three

usecure6 of 320Not in the top three

Microsoft Attack Simulation Training5 of 320Not in the top three

Hoxhunt4 of 320Not in the top three

Arctic Wolf Managed Security Awareness3 of 320Not 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 CanIPhish. 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 32 answers that named CanIPhish and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hooksecurity.co30

hoxhunt.com20

smallbizsecurityguide.com20

learn.g2.com17

adaptivesecurity.com14

expertinsights.com14

easyllama.com10

cipherssecurity.com9

g2.com9

guardey.com9

152 of the 152 domain citations in answers naming CanIPhish came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

hooksecurity.co/blog/best-security-awareness-training-small-business29

smallbizsecurityguide.com/best-security-awareness-training-platforms-202620

hoxhunt.com/blog/best-security-awareness-training18

learn.g2.com/best-security-awareness-training-software17

expertinsights.com/security-awareness-training/the-top-security-awareness-training-platfor11

easyllama.com/blog/best-security-awareness-training-providers10

adaptivesecurity.com/blog/best-security-awareness-training-small-businesses8

guardey.com/security-awareness-small-business7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 CanIPhish'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 CanIPhish, 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 caniphish.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.