Small business▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 24 → 11 of 114
2 categories · RankedFlare
48Judge labels
10First choices
1Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
6% in DRP for small business buyers
Rank 8 of 119 in the mid-market standing
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 6 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Flare →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business11 of 126
2%5 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market8 of 119
5%6 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise4 of 83
4%8 labels
under the label threshold
In threat intel · 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 Flare 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 5% | 8 of 119 | 0% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by MISP at 12% | ▼−1Since September 2026: 6% → 6%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Digital risk protection | Security operations | 2% | 10 of 86 | 0% | 12 | accepted challenger |
Movement
Since September 2026, Flare held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Threat intel · by segment
Mid-market▼−1Since September 2026: 6% → 6%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
6%from 6% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 8 of 111, unchanged
Enterprise▲+5Since September 2026: 0% → 5%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
5%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 21 → 4 of 78
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intel | 6% | 6% | ▼−1Since September 2026: 6% → 6%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 of 119, unchanged |
| DRP | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 10 of 86, 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 Flare 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 Flare 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 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 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
Direct6 labels1
Paraphrase13 labels4
Comparative12 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained10 labels3
Scale-constrained6 labels2
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative48 labels in all, every segment counted; 10 of the 11 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 platforms that offer Extended Threat Intelligence (XTI) or Brand/Identity protection (like SOCRadar, Flare, or Cyble)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Threat intel · scale prompt · first choice
“If you have an extremely small team with no time for research: Choose Flare.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Threat intel · direct prompt · first choice
“I'd trial Flare first—but I wouldn't commit until you get a written quote” GPT-6 Luna · DRP · budget prompt · first choice
“Option B: Flare (Best Commercial Platform for Mid-Market B2B)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Threat intel · paraphrase prompt · first choice
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 Flare, over the 48 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Flare was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Flare, over the 48 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Flare 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 Flare. 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 48 of the 48 answers that named Flare and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
upguard.com33
flare.ioYour site31
cloudsek.com16
expertinsights.com16
g2.com14
bitsight.com13
cyble.com13
breachsense.com12
reddit.com12
underdefense.com11
140 of the 171 domain citations in answers naming Flare came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
flare.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Flare takes 5% of first choices and MISP takes 12%.ShowHide
Search and answers
flare.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Flare takes 5% of first choices and MISP takes 12%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “threat intelligence platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “threat intelligence platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 49,500 a month (“flare”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 97,656 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 12,128 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 2,256 · 99 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 2,129
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 2 clicks and $0 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
5%
rank 8 of 119 in threat intel
Segment leader
12%
MISP
- First choices
- 10 across its categories
- Named in
- 48 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 48 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
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on flare.io
2,192
subdomains included
Content
1,790
counted in the table below
Documentation
122
Product · Integration
32 · 10
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glossary or explainer | 1,429 | 40 | 2026-09-28 | ASM, MDR | |
| News or press | 160 | 4 | 2026-09-08 | Threat intel, PAM | |
| Conference or event | 147 | 7 | 2026-10-06 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 16 | 0 | 2026-04-09 | ||
| Blog | 14 | 0 | 2026-06-26 | Threat intel | |
| Case study | 8 | 0 | 2023-08-10 | ||
| Template or tool | 8 | 0 | 2026-04-28 | ||
| Comparison | 6 | 0 | 2023-04-06 | ||
| Report or ebook | 2 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-10-06Wild west hackin fest deadwood conference or event
- 2026-09-28Healthcare attack surface fhir hl7 endpoints glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-28Aviation infrastructure dns exposure glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-25Infostealer market takedowns impact glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-24Tweakos stealer telegram c2 ecosystem 2 glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-2440 of internet facing medical image servers have no admin password conference or event
Events in person
Last twelve months
- October 7, 2026 to October 9, 2026Wild West Hackin’ Fest – Deadwood 2026Deadwood Mountain Grand, Deadwood · hybrid · hosted
- October 6, 2026 to October 7, 2026Pre-Conference Training at WWHF – Deadwood 2026Deadwood Mountain Grand, Deadwood · hosted
As the event pages on flare.io state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page flare.io 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 Flare
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Flare; a claim can dispute any of them.
Flare (Flare.io) 3
Follow Flare
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
Flare is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Flare is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Identity-first threat intelligence platform with dark web monitoring, credential monitoring, and attack surface management.
- For
- security teams
- Free plan or trial
- Free Trial flare.io
- Certifications
- SOC 2
- Customers named
- Socura
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, integrations, hosting
What Flare's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: flare.io, flare.io/trust, flare.io/solutions/healthcare, flare.io/learn/resources/blog/tag/customer-stories. 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 Flare'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 Flare, 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 Flare by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Flare 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 Flare, 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.