AI Indexes
IT AI Index
Index › Products › Continuity Software · October 2026 Edition
1 category · Named, not ranked

Continuity Software

1Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
1 / 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.
Standing
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Continuity Software was named 1 time in Business continuity, where LogicManager led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In business continuity · 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 Continuity Software 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
Business continuity managementSecurity operations0%106 of 114100%1under 10 labels · led by LogicManager at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Continuity Software 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 Continuity Software across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini00000
Gemini 3.5 Flash00000
Perplexity Sonar00000
Grok 4.1 Fast00000
Mistral Small00000
DeepSeek V4 Flash00000
Llama 4 Maverick00000
Qwen 3.7 Flash00000
Kimi K200000
GLM 4.7 FlashX00011
MiniMax M2.500000
GPT-6 Luna00000
Muse Glimmer 30B00000

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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative1 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.

“feature-rich but comes with significant operational friction... Why to avoid: Users report that it can be resource-intensive” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Business continuity · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Continuity Software, over the 1 answer that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Continuity Software was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
Archer1 of 10Not among the top eight
Everbridge 3601 of 10Not among the top eight
Fusion Risk Management1 of 10Not among the top eight
GlobalSuite1 of 10Not among the top eight
MetricStream Business Continuity Management1 of 10Not among the top eight
Riskonnect Business Continuity & Resilience1 of 10Not 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 Continuity Software. 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 1 of the 1 answers that named Continuity Software and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

bigideasdb.com1
fortiv.io1
g2.com1
gitnux.org1
learn.g2.com1
rfp.wiki1
riskpublishing.com1
softwareadvice.com1
sprinto.com1
worldmetrics.org1

No domain is on file for Continuity Software, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Continuity Software

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.

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 Continuity Software'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 Continuity Software, 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 Continuity Software by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

  • where Continuity Software 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 Continuity Software, 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.
The subscriber app

A verification link goes to your work email; an address at the vendor's own domain is approved on the spot, any other is reviewed by hand. Your email is never published. Claiming gives no say over labels, shares, verdicts or which quotes appear.