IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration · September 2026 Edition

Check Point · 1 category · Ranked

Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration

68Judge labels

9First choices

5Negative labels

12 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Best standing

10% in Email security for mid-market buyers

Rank 4 of 71 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger

2 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 8% of its 26 labels there were negative.

By buyer segmentStrongest at mid-market.

Small business6 of 57

In email security · 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 Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration 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
Email security	Security operations	10%	4 of 71	8%	26	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration 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 Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration 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	2	0	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	3	3	0	0	6
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	3	0	5
Mistral Small	1	0	1	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	2	1	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	0	0	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

Direct10 labels3

Paraphrase5 labels3

Comparative19 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained11 labels2

Scale-constrained9 labels1

Negative14 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative68 labels in all, every segment counted; 9 of the 11 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.

“It is widely considered one of the most effective tools on the market for stopping sophisticated phishing, malicious attachments, and compromised-account threats.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Email security · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Avanan: Recommended for most small businesses, with a 5-minute setup and best AI detection. Pricing is $3–5 per user per month” Mistral Small · Email security · budget prompt · first choice

“Highly rated by mid-market users. Offers inline API protection ... and very strong pricing.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Email security · scale prompt · first choice

“I'd suggest Check Point Email Security (Avanan) or IRONSCALES as top choices” MiniMax M2.5 · Email security · paraphrase 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.

“Complex setup, false positives, limited features, slow performance” Kimi K2 · Email security · negative prompt · soft negative

“Status: Caution Required” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Email security · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, over the 68 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Defender for Office 36555 of 6818Not in the top three

Proofpoint Email Protection54 of 6810Not in the top three

Mimecast Email Security47 of 683Not in the top three

Abnormal AI45 of 686Not in the top three

IRONSCALES39 of 685Not in the top three

Barracuda Email Protection29 of 684Not in the top three

Cisco Secure Email17 of 680Not in the top three

SpamTitan16 of 680Not in the top three

Sublime Security15 of 682Not in the top three

Google Workspace9 of 680Not 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 Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration. 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 51 of the 68 answers that named Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com40

expertinsights.com24

ironscales.com21

simplyit.biz20

learn.g2.com19

kaseya.com18

sublime.security17

cybervendorguide.com15

checkpoint.comYour site14

proofpoint.com14

188 of the 202 domain citations in answers naming Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/email-security39

ironscales.com/blog/the-best-email-security-companies-rankings-and-reviews20

simplyit.biz/resources/email-security-platforms-small-business-202620

learn.g2.com/best-cloud-email-security-platforms19

expertinsights.com/email-security/top-email-security-gateways18

kaseya.com/blog/best-email-security-solutions18

cybervendorguide.com/guides/email-security15

esecurityplanet.com/products/best-email-security-software13

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration; a claim can dispute any of them.

Check Point Avanan 5Avanan 2Check Point 2Check Point (Avanan) 2Check Point Email Security 2Check Point Harmony Email 2Avanan (Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration) 1Avanan (Check Point) 1Avanan/Check Point 1Avanan/Check Point Harmony Email 1Check Point Avanan / Harmony Email & Collaboration 1Check Point Email Security (Avanan) 1Check Point Email Security (formerly Avanan) 1Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration (formerly Avanan) 1Check Point Harmony/Avanan 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 Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration'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 Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, 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 checkpoint.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.