IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Hunters · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Hunters

10Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Hunters was named 4 times in XDR and 1 other category, where Microsoft Defender XDR led with 63%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market31 of 61

under the label threshold

Enterprise17 of 47

under the label threshold

In xdr · 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 Hunters 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
Extended detection and response	Security operations	0%	31 of 61	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender XDR at 63%
SIEM platforms	Security operations	0%	43 of 49	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Sentinel at 41%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative6 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 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.

“Open XDR platforms (like Elastic, Hunters, Stellar Cyber) offer: Better third-party integration” Kimi K2 · XDR · negative prompt · first choice

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.

“one Reddit comment says to avoid it, but the evidence in the provided results is thin” Perplexity Sonar · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative

“it does not come with native telemetry—it's a correlation layer, which some users find confusing” DeepSeek V4 Flash · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Hunters, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Hunters was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Defender XDR8 of 101Not in the top three

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR7 of 101Not in the top three

Stellar Cyber7 of 100Not in the top three

SentinelOne Singularity6 of 100Not in the top three

Trend Vision One5 of 100Not in the top three

Securonix4 of 100Not in the top three

CrowdStrike Falcon3 of 100Not in the top three

CrowdStrike Falcon XDR3 of 100Not in the top three

Elastic Security3 of 100Not in the top three

Cisco XDR2 of 100Not 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 Hunters. 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 10 of the 10 answers that named Hunters and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gbhackers.com7

cyberpress.org6

decryptiondigest.com6

gartner.com6

paloaltonetworks.com5

aimultiple.com3

arcticwolf.com3

cybersecuritynews.com3

d3security.com3

reddit.com3

Forty-five of the forty-five domain citations in answers naming Hunters came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gbhackers.com/best-xdr-platforms-compared7

cyberpress.org/xdr-platforms-by-business-size6

decryptiondigest.com/blog/best-xdr-platforms-20265

gartner.com/reviews/market/extended-detection-and-response5

aimultiple.com/xdr-solutions3

arcticwolf.com/resources/blog/arctic-wolf-xdr-before-xdr3

d3security.com/blog/xdr-detection-investigation-gap3

venn.com/learn/endpoint-security/xdr3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Hunters

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

Hunters.ai 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 Hunters'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 Hunters, 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 hunters.security 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.