IT AI Index

Index › Products › Centraleyes · October 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

Centraleyes

8Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

6 / 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.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Centraleyes was named 4 times in ITDR and 2 other categories, where Huntress Managed ITDR led with 51%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market10 of 105

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In itdr · 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 Centraleyes 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
Identity threat detection and response	Identity and access	2%	10 of 105	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Huntress Managed ITDR at 51%
GRC platforms	Security operations	0%	25 of 75	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Hyperproof at 19%	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Compliance automation	Security operations	0%	42 of 67	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Drata at 34%	=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 Centraleyes 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 Centraleyes 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	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.20	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	0	2
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	1	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 label1

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative8 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.

“Dedicated Identity Leaders: Silverfort, Centraleyes (formerly BeyondTrust).” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ITDR · scale prompt · first choice

“Best for Flexibility & Multi-Tenancy: Centraleyes ... is highly recommended” Qwen 3.7 Flash · GRC · direct prompt · alternative

“Centraleyes if your company is more enterprise-like in structure” GPT-5.4 mini · GRC · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Centraleyes, over the 8 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Centraleyes was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Vanta4 of 81Not among the top eight

Drata4 of 80Not among the top eight

ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management3 of 80Not among the top eight

Kovrr2 of 82Not among the top eight

ZenGRC2 of 82Not among the top eight

RiskLens2 of 80Not among the top eight

Riskonnect1 of 81Not among the top eight

Sprinto1 of 81Not among the top eight

Archer1 of 80Not among the top eight

AuditBoard1 of 80Not among the top eight

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 Centraleyes. 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 8 of the 8 answers that named Centraleyes and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

apono.io2

centraleyes.comYour site2

complyjet.com2

kovrr.com2

metricstream.com2

riskonnect.com2

riskwatch.com2

zengrc.com2

1800officesolutions.com1

atlassystems.com1

Sixteen of the eighteen domain citations in answers naming Centraleyes came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

apono.io/blog/top-10-governance-risk-and-compliance-grc-software-solutions2

riskonnect.com/best-grc-software-platforms-20262

1800officesolutions.com/cybersecurity-risk-assessment-tools1

atlassystems.com/blog/cybersecurity-risk-assessment-software1

axio.com/crq1

bdemerson.com/article/the-best-grc-software-a-practical-evaluation1

bitsight.com/guides/best-cyber-risk-management-platforms-for-enterprises1

bolosign.com/blog/best-compliance-management-software1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on centraleyes.com

2,304

subdomains included

Content

1,271

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

0 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest
Blog	694	11	2026-09-03
Glossary or explainer	267	0	2023-12-14
Conference or event	252	0	2026-04-27
Comparison	25	0	2026-06-08
Template or tool	16	0	2026-01-09
Webinar or virtual event	15	0	2021-04-14
Report or ebook	1	undated
Podcast or video	1	0	2023-12-15

Most recent

2026-09-036 best operational risk management software platforms in 2026 blog
2026-08-31Cyber assessment framework caf version 4 0 blog
2026-08-26Nist 800 171 revision 3 blog
2026-08-23Apollo data breach shows the risk behind a simple phone call blog
2026-08-20Best cybersecurity risk assessment software for grc teams in 2026 blog
2026-08-189 best supplier risk management tools in 2026 blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page centraleyes.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.

Names read as Centraleyes

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

Centraleyes (formerly BeyondTrust) 1

Follow Centraleyes

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.

The company

Centraleyes is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: SaaS-based AI-powered GRC platform that empowers organizations to understand their cyber risks and how best to manage them.
centraleyes.com
For: organizations
centraleyes.com
Certifications: SOC 1SOC 2ISO 27001PCI DSSCMMC
Customers named: Neurosoft
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, hosting

What Centraleyes's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: centraleyes.com, centraleyes.com/category/security, centraleyes.com/products. A claimed page can correct any of 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 Centraleyes'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 Centraleyes, 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 Centraleyes by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Centraleyes 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 Centraleyes, 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.