Small business▼−6Since September 2026: 19% → 13%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
13%from 19% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 2 of 56, unchanged
3 categories · RankedIRONSCALES
75Judge labels
8First choices
3Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
11% in Email security for small business buyers
Rank 8 of 76 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 26 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of IRONSCALES →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business3 of 66
11%25 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market8 of 76
2%26 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise5 of 61
2%15 labels
accepted challenger
In email security · 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 IRONSCALES 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email security | Security operations | 2% | 8 of 76 | 0% | 26 | accepted challenger | ▼−6Since September 2026: 9% → 2%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Client-side protection | Security operations | 0% | 90 of 120 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by cside at 13% | |
| Security awareness training | Security operations | 0% | 38 of 64 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by KnowBe4 at 45% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, IRONSCALES held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Email security · by segment
Mid-market▼−6Since September 2026: 9% → 2%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 9% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 5 → 8 of 71
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 10 → 5 of 58
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email security | 9% | 2% | ▼−6Since September 2026: 9% → 2%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 5 → 8 of 76 |
| Client-side protection | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 90 of 120, unchanged |
| Awareness training | 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 21 → 38 of 64 |
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 IRONSCALES 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 IRONSCALES 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 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 labels6
Paraphrase14 labelsNone
Comparative18 labels2not counted in share
Budget-constrained6 labels1
Scale-constrained11 labels1
Negative9 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative75 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 12 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.
“prioritize Behavioral AI (like Abnormal AI or IRONSCALES) over signature-based gateways” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Email security · negative prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, I'd recommend IRONSCALES as the top choice” Kimi K2 · Email security · direct prompt · first choice
“Modern solutions (like Abnormal Security, Check Point/Avanan, Ironscales, or Sublime Security) connect directly to Microsoft or Google via API.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Email security · scale prompt · alternative
“Modern cloud email security (like Avanan, IRONSCALES) is generally preferred over gateway-based approaches” Kimi K2 · Email security · negative 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 IRONSCALES, over the 75 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IRONSCALES was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as IRONSCALES, over the 75 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and IRONSCALES 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 IRONSCALES. 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 71 of the 75 answers that named IRONSCALES and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
ironscales.comYour site41
expertinsights.com37
kaseya.com31
adaptivesecurity.com25
g2.com25
sublime.security23
checkpoint.com22
huntress.com22
proofpoint.com22
barracuda.com21
228 of the 269 domain citations in answers naming IRONSCALES came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
ironscales.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, IRONSCALES takes 2% of first choices and Microsoft Defender for Office 365 takes 32%.ShowHide
Search and answers
ironscales.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, IRONSCALES takes 2% of first choices and Microsoft Defender for Office 365 takes 32%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “email security platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “email security platforms”
7
- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,900 a month (“ironscales”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 28 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 10,997 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 2,534 · 139 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 2,393
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 8 of 76 in email security
Segment leader
32%
Microsoft Defender for Office 365
- First choices
- 8 across its categories
- Named in
- 75 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 71 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on ironscales.com
1,976
subdomains included
Content
1,041
counted in the table below
Documentation
1
Product · Integration
34 · 2
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 493 | 12 | 2026-09-23 | Email security, Awareness training | |
| News or press | 263 | 1 | 2026-08-12 | Email security, SIEM | |
| Glossary or explainer | 153 | 4 | 2026-09-23 | Email security, MFA | |
| Report or ebook | 57 | 1 | 2026-07-14 | Awareness training | |
| Case study | 31 | 2 | 2026-08-12 | ||
| Comparison | 23 | 4 | 2026-09-13 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 14 | 0 | 2026-04-11 | Email security | |
| Conference or event | 5 | 1 | 2026-08-31 | ||
| Template or tool | 1 | 0 | 2025-02-19 | Email security | |
| Podcast or video | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23Hidden text css evasion ai email filters blog
- 2026-09-23Text salting glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-13Huntress comparison
- 2026-09-13Sublime security comparison
- 2026-09-10Cisco ironport comparison
- 2026-08-31Conference brochure lure sustained personalized mail merge campaign conference or event
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page ironscales.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as IRONSCALES
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as IRONSCALES; a claim can dispute any of them.
Ironscales 6
Follow IRONSCALES
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
IRONSCALES is its own company.ShowHide
The company
IRONSCALES is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- AI email security platform that stops phishing, business email compromise, account takeover, and deepfakes across Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace.
- For
- Enterprises, MSPs & MSSPs
- Price stated
- Pricing ironscales.com
- Starting price
- 3.11 ironscales.com/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Free Trial ironscales.com
- Certifications
- First email security vendor verified under Anthropic's Cyber Verification ProgramISO/IEC 27001:2022ISO/IEC 42001:2023SOC 2 Type 2
- Customers named
- TelitKeelingsInterlacedKeelings Case Study - Irish Fresh Produce Leader...DynacommCyberScopeSentry CyberCloudTech24
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, hosting
What IRONSCALES's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: ironscales.com, ironscales.com/pricing, trust.ironscales.com, ironscales.com/platform, ironscales.com/case-studies. 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 IRONSCALES'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 IRONSCALES, 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 IRONSCALES by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where IRONSCALES 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 IRONSCALES, 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.