3 categories · RankedIntruder
Standing by category
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attack surface management | Security operations | 59% | 1 of 104 | 3% | 32 | endorsed leader |
| Vulnerability management platforms | Security operations | 16% | 2 of 80 | 0% | 19 | accepted challenger |
| Penetration testing as a service | Security operations | 0% | 21 of 76 | 25% | 8 | under 10 labels · led by Cobalt at 44% |
Movement
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
By framing
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Best value paid option: Intruder is frequently recommended for SMBs due to transparent pricing, comprehensive features, and a free tier that actually works” MiniMax M2.5 · ASM · budget prompt · first choice
“The "Lean Security" Pick: Intruder ... Best for: Companies with small security/IT teams who need simple, automated, and continuous vulnerability scanning.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Vuln management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Intruder is especially noted for its automation and suitability for the mid-market, making it a strong recommendation for most organizations in this category.” Mistral Small · ASM · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Intruder is the safest all-around pick (transparent pricing, built for teams without dedicated security staff, strong SMB fit)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · ASM · budget 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.
“External tools (like Intruder or Detectify) focus on what the *internet* sees. Avoid using these if your primary goal is managing internal corporate network exposure” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ASM · negative prompt · soft negative
“Intruder-style PTaaS tools can be cheaper, but they are not a substitute for a full penetration test” Perplexity Sonar · PTaaS · budget prompt · soft negative
“Intruder does not offer remediation guidance” DeepSeek V4 Flash · PTaaS · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
What carried it into the answer
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 165 of the 184 answers that named Intruder and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
549 of the 592 domain citations in answers naming Intruder came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as Intruder
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 Intruder'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 Intruder, 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 intruder.io 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.