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 52 → 74 of 77
1 category · RankedFortra DLP
24Judge labels
0First choices
9Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
1Category
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 DLP for mid-market buyers
Rank 76 of 89 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 40% of its 10 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Fortra DLP →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business79 of 82
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market76 of 89
0%10 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise12 of 60
0%11 labels
accepted challenger
In dlp · 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 Fortra DLP 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data loss prevention | Security operations | 0% | 76 of 89 | 40% | 10 | criticized challenger | =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, Fortra DLP held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · DLP · 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 69 → 67 of 80
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 7 → 12 of 55
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DLP | 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 69 → 76 of 89 |
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 Fortra DLP 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 Fortra DLP 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 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
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative8 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained4 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative7 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative24 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.
“IP-heavy industries (manufacturing, defense, biotech) → Fortra Digital Guardian.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DLP · comparative prompt · alternative
“For endpoint-heavy environments... Fortra/Digital Guardian is excellent.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DLP · direct prompt · alternative
“Best Hybrid/Cloud-Focused SMB Solution” Qwen 3.7 Flash · DLP · budget 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.
“"Very poor support" and "Difficult to implement"... When to avoid: Endpoint-heavy deployments needing reliable onboarding.” Grok 4.20 · DLP · negative prompt · hard negative
“Slow performance... Complex policy creation... High cost... "Our deployed Digital Guardian deployment was failing miserably."” Kimi K2 · DLP · negative prompt · hard negative
“requiring heavier deployment and ongoing management” Perplexity Sonar · DLP · negative prompt · soft negative
“Steep learning curve that can slow adoption” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DLP · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Fortra DLP, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Fortra DLP was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Fortra DLP, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Fortra DLP 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 Fortra DLP. 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 24 of the 24 answers that named Fortra DLP and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
strac.io20
checkpoint.com13
forcepoint.com13
underdefense.com12
gartner.com11
currentware.com10
venn.com9
aimultiple.com8
fortra.comYour site8
nightfall.ai8
104 of the 112 domain citations in answers naming Fortra DLP came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
fortra.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Fortra DLP takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Purview DLP takes 46%.ShowHide
Search and answers
fortra.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Fortra DLP takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Purview DLP takes 46%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “data loss prevention platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “data loss prevention platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 50 a month (“fortra dlp”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 125,581 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 18,051 · 898 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 8,577
- Paid Google search
- 2 searches its ads show for, about 2 clicks and $34 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 76 of 89 in DLP
Segment leader
46%
Microsoft Purview DLP
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 24 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 24 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 fortra.com
5,294
subdomains included
Content
3,329
counted in the table below
Documentation
6
Product · Integration
347 · 11
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 2,245 | undated | DLP, MFA | ||
| Report or ebook | 371 | undated | DLP, Email security | ||
| News or press | 368 | undated | DLP, Email security | ||
| Podcast or video | 142 | undated | DLP, PAM | ||
| Case study | 85 | undated | DLP, EDR | ||
| Comparison | 40 | undated | DLP, SASE | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 38 | undated | ZTNA | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 19 | undated | DLP | ||
| Template or tool | 13 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 8 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page fortra.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 Fortra DLP
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Fortra DLP; a claim can dispute any of them.
Fortra Digital Guardian 2Digital Guardian / Fortra 1Digital Guardian / Fortra DLP 1Fortra 1Fortra (Digital Guardian + Core) 1Fortra (Digital Guardian) DLP 1Fortra DLP (Digital Guardian) 1Fortra DLP (formerly Digital Guardian) 1
Follow Fortra DLP
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
Fortra DLP is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Fortra DLP is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Detect and prevent unauthorized sharing of confidential data across endpoints, networks, and cloud platforms.
- For
- Foundational capabilities for security-conscious organizations; next-level capabilities for mid-sized organizations or organizations with evolving security environments; most comprehensive offering, tailored for large enterprises or highly complex environments.
- Price stated
- simple, tiered pricing for cyber defense fortra.com/pricing
- Customers named
- American ExpressBoseCargillCocaColaDelta Air LinesFedexGoldman SachsGodaddy
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Fortra DLP's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: fortra.com, fortra.com/pricing, trust.fortra.com, fortra.com/platform, fortra.com/platform/brand-protection/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 Fortra DLP'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 Fortra DLP, 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 Fortra DLP by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Fortra DLP 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 Fortra DLP, 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.