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 67 → 70 of 71
IBM · 9 categories · RankedIBM QRadar
147Judge labels
3First choices
65Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
9Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
6% in SIEM for enterprise buyers
Rank 59 of 61 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 45% of its 31 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of IBM QRadar →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business78 of 79
0%19 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market59 of 61
0%31 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise5 of 61
6%55 labels
criticized challenger
In siem · 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 QRadar 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIEM platforms | Security operations | 0% | 59 of 61 | 45% | 31 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Log management | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 59 of 73 | 33% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Datadog Log Management at 28% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| AI security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 107 of 233 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11% | |
| SOAR platforms | Security operations | 0% | 58 of 67 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Tines at 41% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| AI SOC agents | Security operations | 0% | 90 of 104 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Dropzone AI at 24% | |
| Cloud security posture management | Cloud and infrastructure | 0% | 69 of 80 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wiz at 37% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Deception technology | Security operations | 0% | 87 of 94 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Thinkst Canary at 37% | |
| Insider risk management | Security operations | 0% | 57 of 84 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management at 22% | |
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 0% | 90 of 119 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by MISP at 12% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, IBM QRadar held within the floor in all nine categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · SIEM · by segment
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 35 → 53 of 55
Enterprise▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 8 → 5 of 51
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIEM | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 35 → 59 of 61 |
| Logs | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 59 of 73, unchanged |
| AI security | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 107 of 233, unchanged |
| SOAR | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 58 of 67, unchanged |
| AI SOC agents | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 90 of 104, unchanged |
| CSPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 69 of 80, unchanged |
| Deception | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 87 of 94, unchanged |
| Insider risk | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 57 of 84, unchanged |
| Threat intel | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 90 of 119, 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 QRadar across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated IBM QRadar across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct18 labels1
Paraphrase17 labelsNone
Comparative46 labelsNone
Budget-constrained7 labels2
Scale-constrained19 labelsNone
Negative40 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative147 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.
“If you need to meet specific compliance regulations (HIPAA/GDPR) with on-prem hardware: Look at IBM QRadar.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · SIEM · comparative prompt · alternative
“IBM QRadar provides stable out-of-the-box detections for compliance-heavy industries” Muse Glimmer 30B · SIEM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Strong on-prem/hybrid legacy footprint? Consider IBM QRadar.” GPT-5.4 mini · SIEM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Regulated industry, compliance priority | IBM QRadar” Kimi K2 · 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.
“The *specific* platforms most flagged for poor execution are Securonix, ArcSight (for new builds), and QRadar (due to cost/complexity).” DeepSeek V4 Flash · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
“HIGH RISK: Avoid or Plan Immediate Migration ... IBM QRadar (Cloud/SaaS versions) - Critical end-of-life situation” Kimi K2 · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid QRadar SaaS entirely, as it is a dead-end product. Be highly cautious of QRadar on-premises” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
“QRadar Cloud, QRadar SOAR, and QRadar Log Insights reached EOL on April 14, 2026” GLM 4.7 FlashX · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as IBM QRadar, over the 147 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IBM QRadar was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as IBM QRadar, over the 147 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IBM QRadar was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 QRadar. 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 128 of the 147 answers that named IBM QRadar and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
underdefense.com68
exabeam.com53
paloaltonetworks.com45
manageengine.com33
expertinsights.com31
panther.com28
splunk.com28
g2.com27
peerspot.com27
netwitness.com25
365 of the 365 domain citations in answers naming IBM QRadar came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where IBM QRadar stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where IBM QRadar stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 480 a month (“ibm qradar”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 51 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 editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 59 of 61 in SIEM
Segment leader
38%
Microsoft Sentinel
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 147 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 128 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 QRadar
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as IBM QRadar; a claim can dispute any of them.
IBM QRadar SIEM 5IBM 3IBM Security QRadar 3QRadar 2IBM (QRadar) 1IBM QRadar (with watsonx) 1IBM QRadar/Security Analytics 1
Follow IBM QRadar
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 QRadar.ShowHide
The company
IBM is the company behind IBM QRadar.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Learn about intelligent security information and event management (SIEM) with IBM QRadar SIEM for actionable insight into your most critical threats.
- For
- organizations
- Free plan or trial
- Get a free 1-on-1 demo of IBM QRadar SIEM from our experts ibm.com/products/qradar-siem
- Integrations claimed
- 700 ibm.com/products/qradar-siem
- Customers named
- Sutherland
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, certifications, hosting
What IBM QRadar's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: ibm.com/products/qradar-siem, developer.ibm.com/tutorials/awb-mssp-qradar-suite-siem-setup, developer.ibm.com/tutorials/awb-integrate-qradar-siem-with-uax, developer.ibm.com/tutorials/awb-fusing-ibm-qradar-suite-grafana-enhanced-monitoring, developer.ibm.com/tutorials/integrate-sap-business-technology-platform-audit-logs-with-ibm-security-qradar. 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 QRadar'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 QRadar, 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 QRadar by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where IBM QRadar 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 QRadar, 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.