Every category where a model named Exabeam 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
SIEM platforms	Security operations	0%	12 of 61	4%	24	accepted challenger	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Insider risk management	Security operations	0%	24 of 84	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management at 22%
Identity threat detection and response	Identity and access	0%	101 of 105	67%	3	under 10 labels · led by Huntress Managed ITDR at 51%
Deception technology	Security operations	0%	85 of 94	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Thinkst Canary at 37%
Managed detection and response	Security operations	0%	49 of 67	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response at 37%	=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 held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 11 points.

Best category · SIEM · by segment

Small business=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 39 → 23 of 71

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 13 → 12 of 55

Enterprise▲+5Since September 2026: 2% → 7%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

7%from 2% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 7 → 4 of 51

All categories · Mid-market

Category	September 2026	Now	Change	Reading	Rank
SIEM	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 13 → 12 of 61
Insider risk	0%	0%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.	New this edition	Rank 24 of 84, unchanged
ITDR	0%	0%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.	New this edition	Rank 101 of 105, unchanged
Deception	0%	0%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.	New this edition	Rank 85 of 94, unchanged
MDR	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 32 → 49 of 67

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 across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	0	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1	2
Grok 4.20	1	3	0	4
Mistral Small	1	1	1	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	3	0	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	4	2	3	9
Kimi K2	3	0	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	3	1	0	4
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	2	0	2

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

Direct13 labelsNone

Paraphrase17 labels3

Comparative30 labelsNone

Budget-constrained6 labels1

Scale-constrained11 labelsNone

Negative24 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative101 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 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.

“Exabeam Fusion SIEM — strong analytics and automation, well-suited to a growing org with limited analysts.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · SIEM · scale prompt · alternative

“focused on insider threat detection with behavioral analytics and offers a 10GB/day free ingestion tier” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SIEM · comparative prompt · alternative

“Choose Exabeam if you need a comprehensive platform to detect advanced persistent threats (APT)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Insider risk · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Organizations prioritizing user behavior analytics (UEBA) and automated investigation” DeepSeek V4 Flash · SIEM · 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.

“These tools (e.g., older iterations of Exabeam, IBM QRadar, or Splunk add-ons) are often treated as secondary features.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Deception · negative prompt · soft negative

“avoid complex SIEM solutions (like Exabeam or Splunk) unless you want to build custom dashboards” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ITDR · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

“unlike enterprise competitors (like Exabeat or Splunk), Tenable.io has a lower barrier to entry” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ITDR · budget prompt · soft negative

“eliminates cloud-only platforms such as ... Exabeam New-Scale Fusion” Perplexity Sonar · SIEM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Exabeam, over the 101 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Exabeam was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Sentinel64 of 10119Not among the top eight

Splunk Enterprise Security63 of 1019Not among the top eight

IBM QRadar55 of 1011Not among the top eight

Elastic Security37 of 1011Not among the top eight

Securonix Unified Defense SIEM34 of 1011Not among the top eight

LogRhythm31 of 1011Not among the top eight

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSIAM27 of 1010Not among the top eight

Google Security Operations25 of 1012Not among the top eight

Rapid7 InsightIDR23 of 1011Not among the top eight

CrowdStrike Falcon Next-Gen SIEM19 of 1010Not 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 Exabeam. 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 90 of the 101 answers that named Exabeam and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

exabeam.comYour site59

underdefense.com42

paloaltonetworks.com36

expertinsights.com29

manageengine.com25

panther.com21

gartner.com20

microsoft.com19

comparitech.com17

netwitness.com17

226 of the 285 domain citations in answers naming Exabeam came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

underdefense.com/blog/siem-solutions-comparison38

paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/siem-tools-comparison28

exabeam.com/explainers/siem-tools/siem-buyers-guide26

manageengine.com/log-management/top-siem-tools.html21

expertinsights.com/security-operations/the-top-siem-solutions20

panther.com/blog/best-siem-tools20

netwitness.com/blog/top-siem-solutions-for-enterprises17

kaseya.com/blog/best-siem-tools16

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

exabeam.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Exabeam takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Sentinel takes 38%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “siem platform”

Position for “siem platforms”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 1,900 a month (“exabeam”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 82 a month
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

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

6 ads · 6 text · 0 shown in the last 30 days

First shown December 2024, as LogRhythm, Inc, verified. Ads started 2025-10 to 2026-09: 2 in the year, 4 before.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 12 of 61 in SIEM

Segment leader

38%

Microsoft Sentinel

First choices: 4 across its categories
Named in: 101 answers
Its own site cited: in 90 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.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on exabeam.com

4,469

subdomains included

Content

1,502

counted in the table below

Documentation

2,424

Product · Integration

23 · 10

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	867	21	2026-09-24	SIEM, XDR
Podcast or video	217	4	2026-09-23	SIEM, Logs
Report or ebook	175	10	2026-09-16	SIEM, XDR
Webinar or virtual event	84	6	2026-09-15	SIEM, XDR
Comparison	61	1	2026-07-23	SIEM, XDR
Glossary or explainer	37	2	2026-08-28	SIEM, DLP
Case study	35	3	2026-09-22
Template or tool	14	0	2024-03-06	SIEM
News or press	8	5	2026-09-23	SIEM
Conference or event	4	0	2023-06-21

Most recent

2026-09-24The first government breach by an ai agent wont be the last blog
2026-09-23Complacency kills why more discomfort might fix your burnout podcast or video
2026-09-23Exabeam accelerates global channel momentum as exabeam apex partner program drives measurable growth news or press
2026-09-22Ga technologies case study
2026-09-18The player coach ciso engineering trust in ai agents with open source tools podcast or video
2026-09-17What openais misalignment reports tell security teams about ai agents blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page exabeam.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.

Names read as Exabeam

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

Exabeam Fusion 3Exabeam Fusion SIEM 3Exabeam New-Scale Fusion 3Exabeam/Exaforce 1Exabeat 1

Follow Exabeam

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 its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Cybersecurity & Compliance with Security Log Management and SIEM
exabeam.com
For: security operations teams
exabeam.com
Free plan or trial: free and heavily discounted licensing exabeam.com/partners
Integrations claimed: 650 exabeam.com/partners
Certifications: certifications aligned to product roadmap
Customers named: Resorts World Las VegasSA Power NetworksMizuho Financial GroupSecure SoftThe Football AssociationAssurityIdentropyGrant Thornton
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, hosting

What Exabeam's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: exabeam.com, exabeam.com/use-cases/compliance, exabeam.com/solutions, exabeam.com/customers, exabeam.com/partners. 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'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, 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 by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Exabeam 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, 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.