CrowdStrike · 6 categories · RankedCrowdStrike Falcon
333Judge labels
51First choices
86Negative labels
12 of 12Models named it
6Categories
September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
43% in EDR for enterprise buyers
Rank 5 of 54 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
3 of 12 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 20% of its 35 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentAn enterprise product: leader at enterprise, not named at small business.
Small business12 of 40
0%41 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market5 of 54
12%35 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise1 of 50
43%49 labels
endorsed leader
In edr · 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 CrowdStrike Falcon 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 12% | 5 of 54 | 20% | 35 | accepted challenger |
| Endpoint protection | IT operations and endpoint | 4% | 4 of 99 | 21% | 33 | accepted challenger |
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 2% | 14 of 128 | 0% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by NordStellar at 13% |
| Extended detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 14 of 61 | 28% | 29 | criticized challenger |
| Container and Kubernetes security | Cloud and infrastructure | 0% | 28 of 78 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Aqua Security at 18% |
| Vulnerability management platforms | Security operations | 0% | 53 of 80 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Rapid7 InsightVM at 45% |
Movement
This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for CrowdStrike Falcon 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 CrowdStrike Falcon 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 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 13 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 9 |
| Mistral Small | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 9 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 4 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 14 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 5 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 14 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 10 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 4 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 10 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 9 |
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
Direct62 labels22
Paraphrase63 labels21
Comparative71 labels36not counted in share
Budget-constrained43 labels1
Scale-constrained35 labels7
Negative59 labels6not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative333 labels in all, every segment counted; 51 of the 93 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.
“The Best Overall Performance: CrowdStrike Falcon ... If your primary concern is having the absolute best defense against advanced attackers, this is the top pick.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · EDR · direct prompt · first choice
“The industry leader in terms of detection and threat intelligence. Excellent MDR offering (Falcon Complete), though it tends to be on the premium price end.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Endpoint protection · scale prompt · first choice
“CrowdStrike is a market share leader known for its exceptionally lightweight agent and cloud-native "Threat Graph" correlation engine.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · XDR · comparative prompt · first choice
“Pros: Highest detection rates in many independent tests; extensive ecosystem integrations; excellent user interface for analysts.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Endpoint protection · comparative prompt · first choice
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.
“You do *not* need to avoid these industry leaders—they are among the most effective tools on the market. However, you must be cautious about how you deploy and configure them” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · soft negative
“deeply embedded within massive, enterprise-grade licensing suites like Microsoft and CrowdStrike... requires an exorbitant financial commitment” Claude Haiku 4.5 · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“Some XDR platforms (such as CrowdStrike and Sophos) are cloud-only, which can be a limitation if you require on-premises data collection” Mistral Small · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“These platforms are cloud-only and lack on-premises management servers... its default policy prioritizes "visibility" over "blocking."” Qwen 3.7 Flash · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CrowdStrike Falcon, over the 332 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CrowdStrike Falcon was named but was not.
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 CrowdStrike Falcon. 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 264 of the 332 answers that named CrowdStrike Falcon and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
gbhackers.com176
cyberpress.org120
cybersecuritynews.com111
huntress.com75
gartner.com63
decryptiondigest.com62
paloaltonetworks.com57
sentinelone.com56
g2.com50
guideflow.com48
818 of the 818 domain citations in answers naming CrowdStrike Falcon came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as CrowdStrike Falcon
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as CrowdStrike Falcon; a claim can dispute any of them.
CrowdStrike 16CrowdStrike Falcon Go 3CrowdStrike Falcon Enterprise 2CrowdStrike (Falcon Insight XDR) 1CrowdStrike Falcon (Adversary Intelligence) 1CrowdStrike Falcon (Falcon Insight) 1CrowdStrike Falcon (with Falcon Complete) 1CrowdStrike Falcon Complete 1CrowdStrike Falcon Go/Pro 1CrowdStrike Falcon Platform 1Crowdstrike 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 CrowdStrike Falcon'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 CrowdStrike Falcon, 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 crowdstrike.com 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.