Small business▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 5 → 13 of 73
ESET · 5 categories · RankedESET PROTECT
83Judge labels
2First choices
5Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
5Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in Endpoint protection for mid-market buyers
Rank 10 of 86 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 6% of its 16 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of ESET PROTECT →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business13 of 78
0%23 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market10 of 86
2%16 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise24 of 48
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
In endpoint protection · 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 ESET PROTECT 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endpoint protection | IT operations and endpoint | 2% | 10 of 86 | 6% | 16 | accepted challenger | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 12 of 55 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint at 30% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Extended detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 20 of 58 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender XDR at 40% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Client-side protection | Security operations | 0% | 33 of 120 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by cside at 13% | |
| Vulnerability management platforms | Security operations | 0% | 49 of 77 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Rapid7 InsightVM at 30% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, ESET PROTECT held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Endpoint protection · by segment
Mid-market▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 8 of 83, unchanged
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 14 → 23 of 48
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XDR | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 20 of 58 |
| Endpoint protection | 4% | 2% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 10 of 86 |
| EDR | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 12 of 55 |
| Client-side protection | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 33 of 120, unchanged |
| Vuln management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 49 of 77, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated ESET PROTECT across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated ESET PROTECT across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 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
Direct10 labelsNone
Paraphrase13 labelsNone
Comparative18 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained24 labels2
Scale-constrained3 labelsNone
Negative15 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative83 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 5 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.
“Prioritize vendors that hold "Product of the Year" or "Certified EPR" status, such as ESET, Bitdefender, SentinelOne, and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · first choice
“or basic ESET PROTECT tiers. These options offer a good balance between cost and features” Llama 4 Maverick · Endpoint protection · budget prompt · first choice
“Prioritize leaders from 2024 tests: ESET PROTECT” Grok 4.20 · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · first choice
“Mid-size firm with some security expertise | ESET Protect Advanced | Reliable detection, low system impact” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Endpoint protection · paraphrase 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.
“often praised, but the same source flags limited control over Linux endpoints as a drawback to validate” Perplexity Sonar · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ESET PROTECT, over the 83 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ESET PROTECT was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ESET PROTECT, over the 83 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ESET PROTECT was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 ESET PROTECT. 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 81 of the 83 answers that named ESET PROTECT and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
huntress.com33
guideflow.com32
g2.com31
techrepublic.com29
tekpon.com28
deel.com27
sentinelone.com23
learn.g2.com20
techradar.com20
cnicsolutions.com17
260 of the 260 domain citations in answers naming ESET PROTECT came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
eset.com ranks 2 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, ESET PROTECT takes 2% of first choices and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint takes 22%.ShowHide
Search and answers
eset.com ranks 2 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, ESET PROTECT takes 2% of first choices and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint takes 22%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “endpoint protection platform”
2
Position for “endpoint protection platforms”
3
- Searches for its name, Google
- 390 a month (“eset protect”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 22 a month
- Its company's site
- eset.com shared with ESET's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 637,959 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 26,448 · 2,085 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 49,182
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 42 clicks and $4,397 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 10 of 86 in endpoint protection
Segment leader
22%
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
- First choices
- 2 across its categories
- Named in
- 83 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 81 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 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.
Names read as ESET PROTECT
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as ESET PROTECT; a claim can dispute any of them.
ESET 7ESET PROTECT Enterprise 3ESET PROTECT (Basic Tiers) 1ESET PROTECT Advanced 1ESET Protect 1ESET Protect (with Vulnerability & Patch Mgmt) 1ESET Protect Advanced 1
Follow ESET PROTECT
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.
The company
ESET is the company behind ESET PROTECT.ShowHide
The company
ESET is the company behind ESET PROTECT.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Superior protection with continuous threat hunting and monitoring via 24/7 managed detection & response service.
- For
- business
- Price stated
- 2 270,00kr excl. VAT; 2 950,00kr excl. VAT; 3 630,00kr excl. VAT; Price available on request eset.com/no/eset-protect-mdr
- Starting price
- 2 270,00kr excl. VAT eset.com/no/eset-protect-mdr
- Free plan or trial
- Try before you buy eset.com/no/eset-protect-mdr
- Certifications
- SOC 2 2. tipa sertificēts risinājumsSOC 2 Tipo 2
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, hosting, customers
What ESET PROTECT's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: eset.com/no/eset-protect-mdr, eset.com/it/aziende/protect-platform, eset.com/lv/business/eset-protect-mdr, eset.com/uy/empresas/eset-protect-mdr, eset.com/us/business/protect-platform. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 ESET PROTECT'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 ESET PROTECT, 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 ESET PROTECT by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where ESET PROTECT 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 ESET PROTECT, 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.