Every category where a model named FOSSA 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
Software composition analysis	Developer platform	0%	14 of 49	0%	18	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for FOSSA 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 FOSSA across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative21 labelsNone

Budget-constrained11 labelsNone

Scale-constrained9 labelsNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative54 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.

“If strict license compliance for distributed software is critical, specialists like FOSSA or Black Duck make more sense” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SCA · negative prompt · alternative

“Alternatives Often Praised: Socket (malicious pkgs), Endor Labs (noise reduction), FOSSA (licenses).” Grok 4.1 Fast · SCA · negative prompt · alternative

“Strong for license and legal exposure, but may not be as strong in vulnerability prioritization.” Mistral Small · SCA · negative prompt · alternative

“If your company"s primary concern is legal and license compliance ... FOSSA is the best option.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SCA · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as FOSSA, over the 54 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and FOSSA was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Snyk Open Source50 of 5418Not in the top three

Black Duck36 of 546Not in the top three

Mend.io33 of 542Not in the top three

Sonatype Lifecycle24 of 544Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Check23 of 542Not in the top three

Trivy21 of 547Not in the top three

Endor Labs21 of 543Not in the top three

JFrog Xray17 of 540Not in the top three

Checkmarx SCA15 of 540Not in the top three

Semgrep Supply Chain14 of 541Not 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 FOSSA. 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 46 of the 54 answers that named FOSSA and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

endorlabs.com37

guideflow.com27

dupple.com24

expertinsights.com21

cycode.com20

ox.security20

toolradar.com18

blog.jetbrains.com15

safeguard.sh14

startupstash.com13

209 of the 209 domain citations in answers naming FOSSA came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools-05b7a35

guideflow.com/blog/software-composition-analysis-tools26

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools25

dupple.com/learn/best-software-composition-analysis-tools24

expertinsights.com/application-security/the-top-software-composition-analysis-tools21

ox.security/blog/software-composition-analysis-and-sca-tools20

toolradar.com/blog/best-software-composition-analysis-tools18

blog.jetbrains.com/qodana/2025/09/best-software-composition-analysis-tools15

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as FOSSA

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

FOSSA Scan 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 FOSSA'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 FOSSA, 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 fossa.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.