Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 25 → 27 of 83
Check Point · 3 categories · Named, not rankedCheck Point Harmony
9Judge labels
0First 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. Check Point Harmony was named 4 times in Endpoint protection and 2 other categories, where Microsoft Defender for Endpoint led with 22%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market29 of 86
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In endpoint protection · 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 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endpoint protection | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 29 of 86 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint at 22% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AI security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 153 of 233 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11% | |
| Email security | Security operations | 0% | 43 of 76 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Office 365 at 32% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Check Point Harmony held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Endpoint protection · by segment
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email security | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 11 → 43 of 76 |
| Endpoint protection | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 25 → 29 of 86 |
| AI security | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 153 of 233, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Check Point Harmony 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 Check Point Harmony 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative3 labelsNone
Budget-constrained2 labelsNone
Scale-constrained3 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.
No positive label carried a quote.
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 Check Point Harmony, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Check Point Harmony was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Check Point Harmony, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Check Point Harmony 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 Check Point Harmony. 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 9 of the 9 answers that named Check Point Harmony and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
checkpoint.comYour site4
g2.com4
us.fitgap.com4
adaptivesecurity.com3
comparitech.com3
decryptiondigest.com3
expertinsights.com3
guideflow.com3
kaseya.com3
assets.mimecast.com2
Twenty-eight of the thirty-two domain citations in answers naming Check Point Harmony came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Follow Check Point Harmony
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
Check Point is the company behind Check Point Harmony.ShowHide
The company
Check Point is the company behind Check Point Harmony.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Workspace Security Platform
- For
- hybrid and remote workforce
- Free plan or trial
- Start Free Trial checkpoint.com/harmony/saas
- Hosting
- global
- Customers named
- ArmisCloudReachNQM FundingSouthern CyberVisoryFutureSafe
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, integrations, certifications
What Check Point Harmony's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: checkpoint.com/harmony, blog.checkpoint.com/harmony-sase, checkpoint.com/harmony/saas, checkpoint.com/harmony/sase, checkpoint.com/harmony/endpoint. 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 Check Point Harmony'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, 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 Check Point Harmony by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Check Point Harmony 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 Check Point Harmony, 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.