Small business=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 34 → 53 of 55
Cisco · 2 categories · RankedCisco XDR
55Judge labels
0First choices
17Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in XDR for mid-market buyers
Rank 17 of 58 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 27% of its 22 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Cisco XDR →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business61 of 62
0%6 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market17 of 58
0%22 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise11 of 58
0%23 labels
accepted challenger
In xdr · 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 Cisco XDR 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extended detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 17 of 58 | 27% | 22 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 24 of 55 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint at 30% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Cisco XDR held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · XDR · by segment
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 16 → 17 of 53
Enterprise=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 13 → 11 of 46
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XDR | 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 16 → 17 of 58 |
| EDR | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 24 of 55, 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 Cisco XDR 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 Cisco XDR 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 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
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
Direct7 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative22 labelsNone
Budget-constrained2 labelsNone
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative17 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative55 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.
“Cisco XDR takes the open-XDR route: rather than requiring Cisco endpoints everywhere, it ingests telemetry from a long list of third-party tools” Muse Glimmer 30B · XDR · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for: Organizations that want a vendor-neutral, network-first approach with strong cross-domain visibility.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · XDR · comparative prompt · alternative
“If you have a mixed environment / want open XDR: Cisco XDR is the go-to for heterogeneous stacks.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · XDR · scale prompt · alternative
“Running a heterogeneous multi-vendor stack? → Cisco XDR or Stellar Cyber (Open XDR model)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · XDR · comparative 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.
“requires a separate paid license—a meaningful cost change for existing Cisco customers—and feature depth in some areas lags” Claude Haiku 4.5 · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“Cisco XDR: be cautious if your key integrations aren't validated for your environment.” GPT-6 Luna · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“navigating Cisco's multiple acquired portals can still feel highly fragmented” Gemini 3.5 Flash · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“Generic integrations; limited depth outside Cisco ecosystem; tuning-heavy.” Grok 4.20 · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Cisco XDR, over the 55 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cisco XDR was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Cisco XDR, over the 55 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cisco XDR 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 Cisco XDR. 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 53 of the 55 answers that named Cisco XDR and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
expertinsights.com32
paloaltonetworks.com30
aimultiple.com27
coruzant.com21
sentinelone.com21
g2.com18
decryptiondigest.com17
crowdstrike.com16
forrester.com15
gartner.com15
212 of the 212 domain citations in answers naming Cisco XDR came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Cisco XDR stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Cisco XDR stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 720 a month (“cisco xdr”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 19 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on Cisco's site (cisco.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 17 of 58 in XDR
Segment leader
40%
Microsoft Defender XDR
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 55 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 53 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 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 Cisco XDR
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Cisco XDR; a claim can dispute any of them.
Cisco 2Cisco Secure XDR 1
Follow Cisco XDR
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
Cisco is the company behind Cisco XDR.ShowHide
The company
Cisco is the company behind Cisco XDR.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Cisco
- Cisco ACE, Cisco ACI, Cisco ACI / Tetration, Cisco AI Defense, Cisco ASA/Firepower, Cisco AnyConnect, Cisco AppDynamics, Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure and 68 more
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 Cisco XDR'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 Cisco XDR, 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 Cisco XDR by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Cisco XDR 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 Cisco XDR, 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.