Every category where a model named Feroot Security 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
Client-side protection	Security operations	0%	26 of 120	17%	6	under 10 labels · led by cside at 13%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Feroot Security 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 Feroot Security 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	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	0	0	1
Mistral Small	0	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	0	1
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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labels3

Comparative14 labels4not counted in share

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 label1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 8 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.

“Feroot Security (G2: 4.9/5): Automates compliance (PCI DSS, 50+ regs) with AI agents for payment pages. Monitors scripts, blocks skimming/formjacking.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Client-side protection · comparative prompt · first choice

“A highly compliance-focused platform that uses automated AI analysis to continuously monitor runtime behaviors” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Client-side protection · comparative prompt · alternative

“Primary Strength: Comprehensive compliance automation (supports 50+ regulations).” Mistral Small · Client-side protection · comparative prompt · alternative

“Feroot Security - Best for Compliance-Heavy Industries” Kimi K2 · Client-side protection · direct 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.

“Caveats: Samples only a fraction of sessions, so attacks targeting specific users can fly under the radar.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Client-side protection · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Feroot Security, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Feroot Security was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Jscrambler Webpage Integrity20 of 261Not among the top eight

Source Defense19 of 263Not among the top eight

Reflectiz18 of 265Not among the top eight

Imperva Client-Side Protection16 of 262Not among the top eight

Cloudflare Page Shield12 of 262Not among the top eight

HUMAN Security11 of 262Not among the top eight

cside10 of 260Not among the top eight

Akamai Client-Side Protection & Compliance6 of 261Not among the top eight

c/side5 of 263Not among the top eight

Cloudflare Client-Side Security3 of 260Not 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 Feroot Security. 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 26 of the 26 answers that named Feroot Security and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cside.com25

g2.com21

us.fitgap.com18

geeksframework.com17

startupstash.com17

slashdot.org15

reflectiz.com14

sourceforge.net14

feroot.comYour site9

topbusinesssoftware.com9

150 of the 159 domain citations in answers naming Feroot Security came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cside.com/blog/top-client-side-security-tools-full-guide21

geeksframework.com/software/client-side-protection-solutions17

startupstash.com/top-client-side-protection-tools17

g2.com/categories/client-side-protection16

us.fitgap.com/search/client-side-protection-solutions/enterprise12

cside.com/blog/best-digital-skimming-protection9

slashdot.org/software/client-side-protection/f-enterprise9

reflectiz.com/blog/10-web-visibility-tools8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

feroot.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Feroot Security takes 0% of first choices and cside takes 13%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “client-side protection tool”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “client-side protection tools”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 70 a month (“feroot security”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 1 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 4,806 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 1,624 · 36 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 1,625
Paid Google search: 1 searches its ads show for, about 18 clicks and $62 a month (estimate)

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

15 ads · 15 text · 7 shown in the last 30 days

First shown July 2025, as Feroot Security Inc., verified. Ads started 2025-11 to 2026-10: 13 in the year, 2 before.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 26 of 120 in client-side protection

Segment leader

13%

cside

First choices: 3 across its categories
Named in: 26 answers
Its own site cited: in 26 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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 feroot.com

688

subdomains included

Content

541

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

1 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	310	2	2026-09-23	GRC
Glossary or explainer	132	0	2025-11-25	SIEM, Compliance automation
News or press	51	2	2026-09-23
Comparison	20	0	2026-06-25
Conference or event	13	0	2026-04-16	GRC
Template or tool	8	0	2026-04-28
Webinar or virtual event	4	undated
Report or ebook	3	undated

Most recent

2026-09-23Feroot expands dxcomply with code free consent auditing for native mobile apps news or press
2026-09-23The consent compliance paradox blog
2026-08-21Beyond the compliance snapshot why grc needs continuous evidence blog
2026-07-31Ivan tsarynny on cnbc ai regulation should empower defenders not limit their ability to defend news or press
2026-06-25Cookie consent vs gdpr compliance why network traffic matters more than banners comparison
2026-06-18What canadas bill c 36 means for ai powered digital experiences blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page feroot.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 Feroot Security

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

Feroot Security (PaymentGuard AI / CodeGuard AI) 1

Follow Feroot Security

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

Feroot Security is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: AI-powered browser-based security, privacy, and compliance platform for websites and web applications.
feroot.com
For: Security teams, privacy teams, and compliance teams
feroot.com
Price stated: Contact Feroot for a custom quote tailored to your specific needs. feroot.com/plans
Free plan or trial: Free scan feroot.com
Certifications: SOC 2 Type II CompliantSOC 2PCI DSS - SAQ D; SP
Customers named: InstacartRedditGusto
Not stated on the pages read: Starting price, integrations, hosting

What Feroot Security's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: feroot.com, feroot.com/plans, trust.feroot.com, feroot.com/platform-overview. 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 Feroot Security'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 Feroot Security, 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 Feroot Security by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Feroot Security 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 Feroot Security, 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.