Every category where a model named Huntress 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
Endpoint protection	IT operations and endpoint	0%	23 of 99	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Cloud at 22%
SIEM platforms	Security operations	0%	25 of 49	0%	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 Huntress 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 Huntress 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	0	1	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	0	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct9 labels2

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative5 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained8 labels2

Negative8 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative33 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 6 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.

“The most practical, low-overhead security insurance policy for mid-market B2B companies that want human-backed security on a tight budget.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Endpoint protection · direct prompt · alternative

“opt for Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions (such as *Huntress, Sophos MDR, or CrowdStrike Falcon Complete*)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · alternative

“| Managed/MDR (e.g., Blumira, Huntress) | Includes staffing | Vendor lock-in” Grok 4.1 Fast · SIEM · scale prompt · alternative

“No security team: Sophos or Huntress (managed EDR add-on).” Grok 4.1 Fast · Endpoint protection · direct 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 Huntress, over the 33 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Huntress was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

SentinelOne12 of 330Not in the top three

Microsoft Sentinel11 of 333Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender for Cloud10 of 335Not in the top three

CrowdStrike9 of 330Not in the top three

Blumira8 of 335Not in the top three

Bitdefender GravityZone8 of 331Not in the top three

Wazuh8 of 330Not in the top three

CrowdStrike Falcon7 of 331Not in the top three

Splunk7 of 330Not in the top three

Elastic Security5 of 330Not 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 Huntress. 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 21 of the 33 answers that named Huntress and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

huntress.comYour site11

gartner.com10

reddit.com9

gbhackers.com8

cnicsolutions.com7

sentinelone.com7

cyberpress.org6

paloaltonetworks.com6

peerspot.com6

solutionsinsider.com6

Sixty-five of the seventy-six domain citations in answers naming Huntress came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

huntress.com/internal-it-cybersecurity-guide/best-endpoint-protection-for-small-businesses8

cnicsolutions.com/cybersecurity-threat-protection/detection-response/best-endpoint-protect7

gartner.com/reviews/market/endpoint-protection-platforms6

gbhackers.com/best-business-antivirus-compared6

blogs.fluencysecurity.com/siem-for-smbs5

costbench.com/best/siem-for-small-business5

q-sec.com/siem-knowledge-base/best-siem-for-small-business5

reddit.com/r/cybersecurity/comments/1b80zza/best_siem_solution_for_small_company5

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Huntress'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 Huntress, 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 huntress.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.