AI Indexes
IT AI Index
Index › Products › IBM OpenPages · October 2026 Edition
IBM · 6 categories · Ranked

IBM OpenPages

104Judge labels
1First choices
43Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
6Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in GRC for enterprise buyers
Rank 50 of 75 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 IBM OpenPages →
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
In grc · 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 IBM OpenPages 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.
CategoryFunctionShareRankNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
GRC platformsSecurity operations0%50 of 7540%10criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Business continuity managementSecurity operations0%30 of 11425%8under 10 labels · led by LogicManager at 24%
Third-party risk managementSecurity operations0%74 of 8750%4under 10 labels · led by UpGuard at 55%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
AI governance platformsData platform0%133 of 135100%1under 10 labels · led by Credo AI at 18%
Compliance automationSecurity operations0%44 of 670%1under 10 labels · led by Drata at 34%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Master data managementData platform0%73 of 92100%1under 10 labels · led by Profisee MDM at 41%

Movement

Since September 2026, IBM OpenPages held within the floor in all six categories: no change cleared 11 points.

Best category · GRC · by segment

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 65 → 54 of 58
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 62 → 53 of 69
Enterprise▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 16 → 9 of 65

All categories · Mid-market

CategorySeptember 2026NowChangeReadingRank
GRC0%0%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 62 → 50 of 75
Business continuity0%0%newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.New this editionRank 30 of 114, unchanged
TPRM0%0%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 30 → 74 of 87
AI governance0%0%newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.New this editionRank 133 of 135, unchanged
Compliance automation0%0%=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Within noiseRank 29 → 44 of 67
Master data0%0%newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.New this editionRank 73 of 92, unchanged

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 IBM OpenPages across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide
ModelFirst choiceAlternativeMentionNegativeLabels
Claude Haiku 4.500000
GPT-5.4 mini01001
Gemini 3.5 Flash01012
Perplexity Sonar01113
Grok 4.2001236
Mistral Small00101
DeepSeek V4 Flash01012
Llama 4 Maverick00101
Qwen 3.7 Flash00022
Kimi K200101
GLM 4.7 FlashX01113
MiniMax M2.501001
GPT-6 Luna01001
Muse Glimmer 30B00011

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
Direct17 labels1
Paraphrase12 labelsNone
Comparative30 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained6 labelsNone
Scale-constrained5 labelsNone
Negative34 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative104 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 4 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.

“highly scalable platform renowned for risk quantification and operational risk” Gemini 3.5 Flash · GRC · comparative prompt · alternative
“AI‑assisted analysis and reporting; suited for large, data‑intensive programs” GLM 4.7 FlashX · TPRM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for enterprise GRC: Riskonnect, ServiceNow BCM, IBM OpenPages, SAI360” Perplexity Sonar · Business continuity · comparative prompt · alternative
“better if BCM is part of a broader enterprise risk/governance program” GPT-5.4 mini · Business continuity · 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.

“Unlike legacy enterprise GRC systems (such as ServiceNow or IBM OpenPages) which are bloated and require six-month implementation cycles” Gemini 3.5 Flash · AI governance · direct prompt · hard negative
“IBM OpenPages: Given the age of some vulnerabilities, consider modern alternatives” GLM 4.7 FlashX · GRC · negative prompt · hard negative
“Enterprise suites (e.g., IBM OpenPages, OneTrust) can feel rigid or overkill for SMBs, with some G2 notes on steep learning curves.” Grok 4.20 · TPRM · negative prompt · soft negative
“without the overwhelming complexity or high costs of enterprise giants like ServiceNow, MetricStream, or IBM OpenPages” Grok 4.20 · GRC · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as IBM OpenPages, over the 104 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IBM OpenPages was named but was not.
ShowHide
ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management52 of 1043Not among the top eight
MetricStream50 of 10410Not among the top eight
Archer46 of 1041Not among the top eight
Vanta34 of 1047Not among the top eight
Drata29 of 1045Not among the top eight
OneTrust GRC24 of 1041Not among the top eight
Sprinto19 of 1046Not among the top eight
LogicGate18 of 1040Not among the top eight
Secureframe17 of 1041Not among the top eight
AuditBoard15 of 1041Not among the top eight
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 IBM OpenPages. 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 100 of the 104 answers that named IBM OpenPages and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

learn.g2.com39
vanta.com36
g2.com32
surecloud.com30
expertinsights.com27
gartner.com24
orbiqhq.com24
metricstream.com22
mitratech.com21
riskwatch.com21

276 of the 276 domain citations in answers naming IBM OpenPages came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where IBM OpenPages stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates
Searches for its name, Google
260 a month (“ibm openpages”)
AI search demand for its name, est.
20 a month
Its own site
It sits on IBM's site (ibm.com), so there are no site figures for it alone

In answers

This edition
Share of first choices
0%
rank 50 of 75 in GRC
Segment leader
19%
Hyperproof
First choices
1 across its categories
Named in
104 answers
Its own site cited
in 100 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.

Names read as IBM OpenPages

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as IBM OpenPages; a claim can dispute any of them.
IBM InfoSphere / IBM OpenPages 1

Follow IBM OpenPages

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

IBM is the company behind IBM OpenPages.
ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked
Positioning
Simplify how you manage risk and regulatory compliance with a unified GRC platform
Hosting
AWS
Customers named
Client ZeroCitiNavigator GasCNP Vita AssicuraIBM
Not stated on the pages read
Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications

What IBM OpenPages's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: ibm.com/products/openpages, ibm.com/case-studies/openpages-grc, developer.ibm.com/articles/awb-ai-governance-ibm-openpages-as-a-service-aws, ibm.com/products/openpages/info, ibm.com/products/openpages/demo. 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 IBM OpenPages'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 IBM OpenPages, 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 IBM OpenPages by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

  • where IBM OpenPages 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 IBM OpenPages, 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.
The subscriber app

A verification link goes to your work email; an address at ibm.com is approved on the spot, any other is reviewed by hand. Your email is never published. Claiming gives no say over labels, shares, verdicts or which quotes appear.