| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI governance platforms | Data platform | 18% | 1 of 135 | 22% | 49 | accepted challenger | |
| AI security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 90 of 233 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11% |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Excels in policy-to-code automation and compliance workflows... Best for enterprises building governance programs from scratch” Grok 4.1 Fast · AI governance · comparative prompt · first choice
“The best overall AI governance platform, pairing an AI use-case registry with regulation-mapped assessments and a policy engine” Claude Haiku 4.5 · AI governance · direct prompt · first choice
“A platform that wins on regulatory alignment (e.g., Credo AI) is not a replacement for deep production observability” Kimi K2 · AI governance · comparative prompt · first choice
“My default pick would be Credo AI if you're buying a dedicated AI-governance platform from scratch.” GPT-6 Luna · AI governance · paraphrase prompt · first choice
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.
“What to Avoid (Too Expensive for Limited Budgets) ... Credo AI | $30,000-$150,000/year | Enterprise-only, quote-gated” Kimi K2 · AI governance · budget prompt · hard negative
“What to avoid (if budget is tight) - Credo AI – starts at ~$50,000/year” DeepSeek V4 Flash · AI governance · budget prompt · hard negative
“Some platforms, such as Credo AI, are strong in documentation and risk assessment but do not currently offer runtime enforcement for live AI traffic.” Mistral Small · AI governance · negative prompt · soft negative
“Has a steep learning curve for initial configuration and is primarily focused on policy and documentation rather than runtime enforcement” Claude Haiku 4.5 · AI governance · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 151 of the 153 answers that named Credo AI and are not a share of its labels.
406 of the 406 domain citations in answers naming Credo AI came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conference or event | 119 | undated | |||
| Blog | 115 | undated | GRC, AI governance | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 94 | undated | GRC | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 30 | undated | |||
| News or press | 17 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 7 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 1 | undated |
As the event pages on credo.ai state them, read October 5, 2026.
Every page credo.ai 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. 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 October 5, 2026.
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.
What Credo AI's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: credo.ai, trust.credo.ai, credo.ai/solutions/gen-ai, credo.ai/customers. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Credo AI'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 Credo AI, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Credo AI by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
AI models recommend Credo AI first in AI governance platforms this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.