Every category where a model named Cortex Xpanse 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
Attack surface management	Security operations	0%	104 of 104	56%	32	criticized challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct18 labels2

Paraphrase14 labels5

Comparative23 labels6not counted in share

Budget-constrained12 labelsNone

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative23 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative95 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 13 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 Palo Alto Cortex Xpanse if you want best-in-class external discovery” GPT-5.4 mini · ASM · comparative prompt · first choice

“Leader in Forrester Wave (top score in strategy, vision, innovation, roadmap).” Grok 4.1 Fast · ASM · comparative prompt · first choice

“Scales massively for external attack surface management (EASM), especially suited for Palo Alto customers.” Mistral Small · ASM · comparative prompt · alternative

“Internet-scale asset discovery and excellent attribution of assets back to business owners.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · ASM · 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.

“skip the heavyweight, six-figure enterprise suites (like *Palo Alto Cortex Xpanse*, which is designed for massive SOCs with budgets to match)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ASM · scale prompt · hard negative

“Palo Alto Cortex Xpanse & Censys ASM: ... often priced out of reach for mid-market budgets and can create "alert fatigue" for a small team.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ASM · direct prompt · hard negative

“Avoid enterprise-focused platforms like Cortex Xpanse or CyCognito” Kimi K2 · ASM · direct prompt · hard negative

“require $50,000+/year – these are not suitable for limited budgets” MiniMax M2.5 · ASM · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Cortex Xpanse, over the 95 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cortex Xpanse was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CyCognito67 of 956Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management59 of 955Not in the top three

Censys ASM45 of 952Not in the top three

Detectify37 of 956Not in the top three

Bitsight36 of 956Not in the top three

Intruder33 of 9528Not in the top three

Tenable Attack Surface Management29 of 950Not in the top three

CrowdStrike Falcon Surface26 of 950Not in the top three

Synack24 of 955Not in the top three

IBM Randori19 of 950Not 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 Cortex Xpanse. 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 81 of the 95 answers that named Cortex Xpanse and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

upguard.com64

synack.com58

bitsight.com44

paloaltonetworks.com40

gartner.com39

wiz.io37

ionix.io31

cycognito.com27

guptadeepak.com27

g2.com24

391 of the 391 domain citations in answers naming Cortex Xpanse came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

upguard.com/blog/best-attack-surface-management-software-solutions64

synack.com/blog/best-attack-surface-management-tools58

bitsight.com/guides/best-external-attack-surface-management-platforms-for-global-enterpris42

gartner.com/reviews/market/external-attack-surface-management34

wiz.io/academy/cloud-security/attack-surface-management-tools33

paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/asm-tools-comparison32

guptadeepak.com/tools/top-10-attack-surface-management-tools-202626

guideflow.com/blog/attack-surface-management-software24

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Cortex Xpanse

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Cortex Xpanse; a claim can dispute any of them.

Palo Alto Cortex Xpanse 10Palo Alto Networks Cortex Xpanse 2Cortex Xpanse (Palo Alto Networks) 1Cortex Xpanse (Palo Alto) 1Expanse 1Palo Alto's Cortex Xpanse 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 Cortex Xpanse'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 Cortex Xpanse, 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 cortex.io 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.