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 48 → 46 of 46
2 categories · RankedForgeRock
46Judge labels
0First choices
28Negative labels
14 / 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
0% in CIAM for enterprise buyers
Rank 67 of 70 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 44% of its 9 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business51 of 51
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market67 of 70
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise58 of 69
0%18 labels
criticized challenger
In ciam · 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 ForgeRock 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer identity and access management | Identity and access | 0% | 67 of 70 | 44% | 9 | under 10 labels · led by Frontegg at 21% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Identity governance | Identity and access | 0% | 64 of 76 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Entra ID Governance at 25% | =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, ForgeRock held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · CIAM · 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 18 → 61 of 61
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 13 → 44 of 62
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIAM | 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 18 → 67 of 70 |
| IGA | 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 36 → 64 of 76 |
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 ForgeRock 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 ForgeRock 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
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
Direct4 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative8 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative24 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative46 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.
“best known for complex enterprise identity needs, orchestration, and large-scale deployments” Perplexity Sonar · CIAM · comparative prompt · alternative
“ForgeRock has long been recognized as a powerful identity platform for large enterprises” Muse Glimmer 30B · CIAM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Known for enterprise-scale identity, orchestration, and complex identity journeys.” GPT-5.4 mini · CIAM · 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.
“the underlying codebases of Ping and ForgeRock remain technically distinct... Verdict: Avoid unless you are a Fortune 500 company” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CIAM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid: Unpatched ForgeRock/Ping Identity, legacy DIY identity infrastructure, and unpatched SaaS identity platforms.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · CIAM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Consistently panned (100% negative in some AI evals) for complexity and poor fit outside niche regulated sectors.” Grok 4.20 · CIAM · negative prompt · hard negative
“received a 100% negative label in one analysis, with multiple models advising caution or avoidance” Mistral Small · CIAM · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ForgeRock, over the 46 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ForgeRock was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ForgeRock, over the 46 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ForgeRock 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 ForgeRock. 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 43 of the 46 answers that named ForgeRock and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cybersecuritynews.com19
guptadeepak.com19
expertinsights.com16
g2.com15
loginradius.com15
guideflow.com14
it-ai-index.com14
checkthat.ai12
securityboulevard.com12
startwithidentity.com12
148 of the 148 domain citations in answers naming ForgeRock came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
pingidentity.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, ForgeRock takes 0% of first choices and Frontegg takes 21%.ShowHide
Search and answers
pingidentity.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, ForgeRock takes 0% of first choices and Frontegg takes 21%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “customer identity platform”
5
Position for “customer identity platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 2,400 a month (“forgerock”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 79 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 73,959 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 9,378 · 940 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 10,341
- Paid Google search
- 2 searches its ads show for, about 2 clicks and $30 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 67 of 70 in CIAM
Segment leader
21%
Frontegg
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 46 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 43 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 pingidentity.com
10,010
subdomains included
Content
1,510
counted in the table below
Documentation
6,101
Product · Integration
65 · 24
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Podcast or video | 482 | undated | MFA, CIAM | ||
| Blog | 339 | 8 | 2026-09-23 | MFA, CIAM | |
| Report or ebook | 251 | undated | CIAM, MFA | ||
| News or press | 217 | undated | CIAM, IGA | ||
| Case study | 92 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 57 | 0 | 2026-01-07 | CIAM, PAM | |
| Template or tool | 31 | undated | CIAM | ||
| Conference or event | 21 | 0 | 2025-03-21 | ||
| Comparison | 11 | 0 | 2025-02-12 | MFA | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 9 | 0 | 2026-03-20 | CIAM |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23September 2026 product updates blog
- 2026-09-23Ai agent security incidents summer 2026 blog
- 2026-09-18Consumer agents enterprise identity blog
- 2026-09-17Ai agent standards security blog
- 2026-09-15Identity gateway post quantum cryptography blog
- 2026-08-26August 2026 product updates blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page pingidentity.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. Of its titles that name a category, most name MFA (36); 43 name its categories the models place it in. 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 ForgeRock
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as ForgeRock; a claim can dispute any of them.
Ping Identity/ForgeRock 2ForgeRock / Ping Identity 1
Follow ForgeRock
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
ForgeRock is its own company.ShowHide
The company
ForgeRock is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Free plan or trial
- Pruebe Ping pingidentity.com/es/platform.html
- Certifications
- FedRAMP alto
- Customers named
- Applied MaterialsMaersk
- Not stated on the pages read
- Positioning, who it is for, price, starting price, integrations, hosting
What ForgeRock's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: pingidentity.com, pingidentity.com/es/platform.html. 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 ForgeRock'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 ForgeRock, 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 ForgeRock by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where ForgeRock 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 ForgeRock, 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.