IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › DefectDojo · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

DefectDojo

11Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. DefectDojo was named 4 times in Vuln management, where Rapid7 InsightVM led with 45%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business33 of 78

under the label threshold

Mid-market29 of 80

under the label threshold

Enterprise45 of 83

under the label threshold

In vuln management · 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 DefectDojo 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
Vulnerability management platforms	Security operations	0%	29 of 80	25%	4	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 DefectDojo 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 DefectDojo across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	1

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

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 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.

“DefectDojo acts as a "single pane of glass." It imports reports from over 500 security tools” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Vuln management · budget prompt · alternative

“open-source alternatives like DefectDojo can be a viable option for budget-constrained teams” Llama 4 Maverick · Vuln management · budget 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.

“viable option for budget-constrained teams, but it has no native scanning capabilities” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Vuln management · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as DefectDojo, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and DefectDojo was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Intruder5 of 115Not in the top three

ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus5 of 112Not in the top three

OpenVAS5 of 111Not in the top three

Trivy4 of 110Not in the top three

Aikido Security3 of 113Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender for Cloud3 of 111Not in the top three

Nuclei3 of 110Not in the top three

Wiz3 of 110Not in the top three

Tenable2 of 111Not in the top three

Wazuh2 of 111Not 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 DefectDojo. 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 6 of the 11 answers that named DefectDojo and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

pdq.com3

upguard.com3

wiz.io3

aikido.dev2

attaxion.com2

axis-intelligence.com2

cipherssecurity.com2

cyberpress.org2

cybersecuritynews.com2

cybervendorguide.com2

Twenty-three of the twenty-three domain citations in answers naming DefectDojo came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

pdq.com/blog/best-vulnerability-management-tools3

aikido.dev/blog/top-cloud-native-application-protection-platforms-cnapp2

attaxion.com/blog/open-source-vulnerability-management-tools2

axis-intelligence.com/best-vulnerability-management-tools-tested2

cyberpress.org/cnapp-platforms-by-business-size-22

defectdojo.com/blog/top-11-open-source-vulnerability-management-tools-for-20262

gbhackers.com/best-cnapp-compared2

issues.house/knowledge/what_are_the_best_open_source_cnapp_tools_in_2026.php2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as DefectDojo

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

OWASP DefectDojo 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 DefectDojo'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 DefectDojo, 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 defectdojo.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.