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 42 → 55 of 62
1 category · RankedCofense PhishMe
50Judge labels
0First choices
9Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
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 Awareness training for mid-market buyers
Rank 16 of 64 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 26% of its 19 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Cofense PhishMe →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business60 of 70
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market16 of 64
0%19 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise8 of 55
0%26 labels
accepted challenger
In awareness training · 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 Cofense PhishMe 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Security awareness training | Security operations | 0% | 16 of 64 | 26% | 19 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Cofense PhishMe held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Awareness training · 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 17 → 16 of 62
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 8 → 7 of 50
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Awareness training | 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 17 → 16 of 64 |
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 Cofense PhishMe 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 Cofense PhishMe 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 | 2 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 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
Direct4 labelsNone
Paraphrase13 labelsNone
Comparative16 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative10 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative50 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.
“Choose Cofense if your main goal is to increase the number of users voluntarily reporting suspicious activity” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Awareness training · comparative prompt · alternative
“Cofense, Proofpoint, and Mimecast are ideal if you already use their email security solutions” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Awareness training · comparative prompt · alternative
“suitable for mid-market and enterprise organizations looking for a behavior change platform” Mistral Small · Awareness training · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“Strong phishing simulation capabilities, specifically designed for phishing awareness” MiniMax M2.5 · Awareness training · 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.
“though the admin overhead is worth factoring in if you have a lean team without capacity for ongoing campaign management” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Awareness training · direct prompt · soft negative
“Extremely expensive if you try to buy these standalone; implementation can be complex and require technical expertise.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Awareness training · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Narrow scope – heavily focused on email phishing while neglecting other threat vectors” Kimi K2 · Awareness training · negative prompt · soft negative
“Narrow training scope with a heavy focus on email phishing that neglects other threats” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Awareness training · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Cofense PhishMe, over the 50 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cofense PhishMe was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Cofense PhishMe, over the 50 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cofense PhishMe 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 Cofense PhishMe. 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 46 of the 50 answers that named Cofense PhishMe and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
adaptivesecurity.com29
hoxhunt.com26
knowbe4.com25
expertinsights.com20
g2.com19
riskpublishing.com18
proofpoint.com15
ransomleak.com15
learn.g2.com13
defendify.com12
192 of the 192 domain citations in answers naming Cofense PhishMe came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cofense.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Cofense PhishMe takes 0% of first choices and KnowBe4 takes 45%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cofense.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Cofense PhishMe takes 0% of first choices and KnowBe4 takes 45%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “security awareness training platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “security awareness training platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 110 a month (“cofense phishme”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 2 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 41,392 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 1,075 · 122 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 4,106
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 16 of 64 in awareness training
Segment leader
45%
KnowBe4
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 50 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 46 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on cofense.com
697
subdomains included
Content
487
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
1 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 372 | 11 | 2026-09-23 | Email security, Awareness training | |
| Conference or event | 65 | 1 | 2027-06-08 | ||
| Case study | 13 | undated | Email security | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 8 | undated | SIEM | ||
| News or press | 8 | undated | Email security | ||
| Comparison | 7 | undated | Email security, Awareness training | ||
| Podcast or video | 7 | undated | Awareness training, Email security | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 5 | 1 | 2026-07-23 | ||
| Report or ebook | 1 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2027-06-08Infosecurity europe conference or event
- 2026-09-23Cofense expands ai driven phishing defense platform to advance secure behavior management blog
- 2026-09-23Beyond human risk a better way to build secure behavior blog
- 2026-09-22From payment plan to ransomware inside a global group attack blog
- 2026-09-17Chatbot conundrum phishing attempts of openai s chatgpt blog
- 2026-09-10False allegations, real threats sexual misconduct claims used as phishing lures blog
Events in person
Upcoming
- November 10, 2026 to November 11, 2026G[P]RC SummitSandton Hotel, Johannesburg · hosts
- January 26, 2027 to January 27, 2027G[P]RC SummitHyatt Regency Riyadh Olaya, Riyadh, KSA · hosts
- April 20, 2027 to April 21, 2027G[P]RC SummitDubai, UAE · hosts
Last twelve months
- June 2, 2026NX ConferenceCrown Sydney, Sydney, AU · hosted
As the event pages on cofense.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page cofense.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. Of its titles that name a category, most name email security (39); 6 name the category the models place it in. 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 Cofense PhishMe
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Cofense PhishMe; a claim can dispute any of them.
Cofense 8Cofense (PhishMe) 2Cofense (formerly PhishMe) 1Cofense PhishMe / SAT 1
Follow Cofense PhishMe
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
Cofense PhishMe is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Cofense PhishMe is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Phishing Training
- For
- organizations
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What Cofense PhishMe's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: cofense.com, cofense.com/platform, cofense.com/customer-stories, cofense.com/about/partners. 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 Cofense PhishMe'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 Cofense PhishMe, 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 Cofense PhishMe by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Cofense PhishMe 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 Cofense PhishMe, 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.