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
Workforce identity and SSO	Identity and access	0%	12 of 48	27%	11	criticized challenger
Customer identity and access management	Identity and access	0%	18 of 74	11%	9	under 10 labels · led by Auth0 at 22%
Identity governance	Identity and access	0%	37 of 77	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Lumos at 20%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for ForgeRock yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated ForgeRock across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	1	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	2	0	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	2
Mistral Small	1	3	0	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	2	2
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative20 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained12 labelsNone

Negative22 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative60 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 for large, complex organizations that need sophisticated policy and regulatory support” Perplexity Sonar · CIAM · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best known for: highly configurable, enterprise-focused identity infrastructure.” GPT-5.4 mini · CIAM · comparative prompt · alternative

“ForgeRock provides open‑source flexibility and strong legacy/IoT support.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Workforce identity · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Existing ForgeRock customers and complex enterprise deployments” MiniMax M2.5 · Workforce identity · 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.

“choosing a heavy enterprise platform (like a custom implementation of ForgeRock or SailPoint) when you are a mid-sized company can be a strategic error due to cost and complexity” Qwen 3.7 Flash · CIAM · negative prompt · soft negative

“heritage platforms — still present in many enterprises, but usually selected for specific legacy, governance, or regional reasons” GPT-5.4 mini · Workforce identity · comparative prompt · soft negative

“More complex to deploy than typical SaaS offerings; ... Higher total cost of ownership due to deployment complexity.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Workforce identity · negative prompt · soft negative

“Merging two massive, overlapping identity platforms inevitably leads to product deprecation, shifting roadmaps” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Workforce identity · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ForgeRock, over the 60 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.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Ping Identity46 of 601Not in the top three

Microsoft Entra ID32 of 6013Not in the top three

Auth023 of 608Not in the top three

CyberArk Identity20 of 600Not in the top three

IBM Verify20 of 600Not in the top three

Okta19 of 606Not in the top three

Okta Workforce Identity16 of 609Not in the top three

OneLogin15 of 600Not in the top three

Microsoft Entra External ID14 of 601Not in the top three

JumpCloud12 of 601Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 48 of the 60 answers that named ForgeRock and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

startwithidentity.com30

expertinsights.com17

loginradius.com17

securityboulevard.com15

okta.com14

siit.io14

g2.com10

guideflow.com10

nhimg.org10

descope.com9

146 of the 146 domain citations in answers naming ForgeRock came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

startwithidentity.com/articles/top-6-workforce-identity-platforms18

expertinsights.com/identity-and-access-management/top-customer-identity-and-access-managem16

startwithidentity.com/rankings/best-iam-platforms14

siit.io/blog/best-iam-tools10

descope.com/blog/post/ciam-solutions9

idmworks.com/insight/customer-identity-and-access-management9

guideflow.com/blog/ciam-software8

forrester.com/blogs/announcing-the-forrester-wave-workforce-identity-platforms-q1-20247

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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.

ForgeRock (Ping) 1ForgeRock (now Ping) 1

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.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at forgerock.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.