Every category where a model named Google Security Operations 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
SIEM platforms	Security operations	0%	9 of 49	8%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Google Security Operations 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 Google Security Operations 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	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1	0	2
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	1	1	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative17 labelsNone

Budget-constrained8 labels3

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative41 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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.

“Choose Google Security Operations (Chronicle) if: - You expect very high log volume” GPT-5.4 mini · SIEM · direct prompt · alternative

“Go with Google SecOps if you are drowning in log volume, need predictable flat-rate pricing” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SIEM · comparative prompt · alternative

“If you are multi-cloud or heavy on GCP/AWS, look at Google Chronicle or Datadog” Qwen 3.7 Flash · SIEM · scale prompt · alternative

“Best for cloud-native Google-centric security analytics: Chronicle / Google SecOps” GPT-5.4 mini · SIEM · 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.

“Avoid SaaS-only SIEM platforms (like Google SecOps ...) for isolated segments.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SIEM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Security Operations, over the 41 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Security Operations was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Sentinel40 of 4116Not in the top three

Splunk Enterprise Security27 of 416Not in the top three

IBM QRadar26 of 410Not in the top three

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSIAM22 of 413Not in the top three

Exabeam22 of 410Not in the top three

Elastic Security21 of 410Not in the top three

Securonix16 of 410Not in the top three

CrowdStrike Falcon Next-Gen SIEM13 of 410Not in the top three

Rapid7 InsightIDR12 of 413Not in the top three

LogRhythm11 of 410Not 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 Google Security Operations. 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 31 of the 41 answers that named Google Security Operations and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

underdefense.com22

paloaltonetworks.com16

expertinsights.com15

gartner.com14

splunk.com12

cipherssecurity.com11

exabeam.com11

solutionsreview.com10

decryptiondigest.com9

guardsarm.com8

128 of the 128 domain citations in answers naming Google Security Operations came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

underdefense.com/blog/siem-solutions-comparison22

paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/siem-tools-comparison16

expertinsights.com/security-operations/the-top-siem-solutions15

cipherssecurity.com/best-siem-tools-in-2026-compared11

gartner.com/reviews/market/security-information-event-management11

solutionsreview.com/security-information-event-management/whats-changed-2024-gartner-magic9

exabeam.com/explainers/siem-tools/siem-buyers-guide8

guardsarm.com/resources/guides/siem-buyers-guide8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Google Security Operations

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

Google Chronicle 2Google SecOps 2Google Security Operations (Chronicle) 2Chronicle 1Google 1Google SecOps (formerly Chronicle) 1Google Security Operations (formerly Chronicle) 1Google Security Operations / Google SecOps 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 Google Security Operations'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 Google Security Operations, 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 google.dev 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.