Small businessnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 15 of 55, unchanged
Exabeam · 1 category · Named, not rankedExabeam Fusion
5Judge labels
1First choices
2Negative labels
5 / 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. Exabeam Fusion was named 1 time in XDR, where Microsoft Defender XDR led with 40%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business15 of 62
2%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market32 of 58
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprise57 of 58
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
In xdr · 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 Exabeam Fusion 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extended detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 32 of 58 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender XDR at 40% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Exabeam Fusion held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · XDR · by segment
Mid-market=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 33 → 31 of 53
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 25 → 46 of 46
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XDR | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 33 → 32 of 58 |
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 Exabeam Fusion 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 Exabeam Fusion 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 label1
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.
“Exabeat / Securonix: As a layer *on top* of existing tools (Log-based XDR)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · XDR · negative 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 Exabeam Fusion, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Exabeam Fusion was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Exabeam Fusion, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Exabeam Fusion 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 Exabeam Fusion. 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 5 answers that named Exabeam Fusion and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
coruzant.com3
gbhackers.com3
aimultiple.com2
cyberpress.org2
decryptiondigest.com2
expertinsights.com2
forrester.com2
linkedin.com2
microsoft.com2
paloaltonetworks.com2
Twenty-two of the twenty-two domain citations in answers naming Exabeam Fusion came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
exabeam.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Exabeam Fusion takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Defender XDR takes 40%.ShowHide
Search and answers
exabeam.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Exabeam Fusion takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Defender XDR takes 40%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “xdr platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “xdr platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Its company's site
- exabeam.com shared with Exabeam's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 66,723 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 9,530 · 890 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 6,355
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 32 of 58 in XDR
Segment leader
40%
Microsoft Defender XDR
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 5 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 4 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 Exabeam Fusion
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Exabeam Fusion; a claim can dispute any of them.
Exabeat 1
Follow Exabeam Fusion
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
Exabeam is the company behind Exabeam Fusion.ShowHide
The company
Exabeam is the company behind Exabeam Fusion.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Exabeam
- Exabeam & LogRhythm, Exabeam Incident Responder
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The New-Scale Security Operations Platform unifies cloud-native SIEM and analytics into an AI-driven solution for threat detection, investigation, and response, automating investigations with context-aware risk scoring, playbooks, and visualizations.
- For
- security analysts and security operations teams
- Integrations claimed
- 1000 exabeam.com/platform/exabeam-new-scale-fusion-security-operations-platform
- Certifications
- ISO 27001SOC 2 Type II
- Customers named
- Port of Antwerp-BrugesMTI Ltd.
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, hosting
What Exabeam Fusion's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: docs.exabeam.com/new-scale-security-operations-platform, exabeam.com/platform/exabeam-nova, exabeam.com/platform/the-exabeam-difference, exabeam.com/platform/exabeam-new-scale-fusion-security-operations-platform, exabeam.com/resources/videos/product-tour-exabeam-siem. 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 Exabeam Fusion'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 Exabeam Fusion, 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 Exabeam Fusion by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Exabeam Fusion 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 Exabeam Fusion, 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.