Index › Products › EJBCA · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

EJBCA

4Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

3 / 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. EJBCA was named 1 time in Certificate management, where Sectigo Certificate Manager led with 27%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business109 of 120

under the label threshold

Mid-market50 of 104

under the label threshold

Enterprise38 of 82

under the label threshold

In certificate 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 EJBCA 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	Since September 2026
Certificate lifecycle management	Identity and access	0%	50 of 104	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Sectigo Certificate Manager at 27%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for EJBCA 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 EJBCA across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.

“Growing org, multi-CA, $75-200K budget → Keyfactor Command.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Certificate management · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as EJBCA, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and EJBCA was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

AppViewX CERT+4 of 40Not among the top eight

Keyfactor Command4 of 40Not among the top eight

Entrust Certificate Manager3 of 40Not among the top eight

Sectigo Certificate Manager3 of 40Not among the top eight

DigiCert Trust Lifecycle Manager2 of 40Not among the top eight

HashiCorp Vault PKI2 of 40Not among the top eight

CyberArk Certificate Manager1 of 41Not among the top eight

CyberArk Certificate Manager – formerly Venafi Trust Protection Platform1 of 41Not among the top eight

CyberArk Venafi – Certificate Manager / Trust Protection Platform1 of 41Not among the top eight

Sectigo SCM Pro1 of 41Not 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 EJBCA. 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 4 of the 4 answers that named EJBCA and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

sectigo.com3

appviewx.com2

axelspire.com2

cyberpress.org2

dataintelo.com2

devopsschool.com2

digicert.com2

docs.venafi.com2

gartner.com2

gitnux.org2

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

Pages cited

axelspire.com/vault/vendors/vendor-comparison-matrix2

cyberpress.org/certificate-lifecycle-pki-by-use-case2

dataintelo.com/report/certificate-lifecycle-management-market2

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-certificate-management-tools-features-pros-cons-comparison2

gartner.com/reviews/market/certificate-lifecycle-management-clm2

globalsign.com/en/enterprise/management-automation/certificate-lifecycle-management2

guptadeepak.com/tools/top-5-pki-certificate-lifecycle-management-tools-20262

keyfactor.com/products/command2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as EJBCA

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

Keyfactor Command + EJBCA 1

Follow EJBCA

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

where EJBCA 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 EJBCA, 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.