| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network access control | Network and edge | 0% | 52 of 111 | 33% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Portnox Cloud at 35% |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Best for: Endpoint-management-led IT teams” MiniMax M2.5 · NAC · direct prompt · alternative
“Ivanti NAC is a strong contender” GLM 4.7 FlashX · NAC · direct prompt · alternative
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.
“Ivanti products have featured repeatedly in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog across 2024–2026, including actively exploited flaws” Claude Haiku 4.5 · NAC · negative prompt · soft negative
“relentless stream of severe, exploited-in-the-wild vulnerabilities... many enterprises are actively migrating away” Gemini 3.5 Flash · NAC · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 15 of the 15 answers that named Ivanti Policy Secure and are not a share of its labels.
Eighty-five of the eighty-five domain citations in answers naming Ivanti Policy Secure came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.
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.
What Ivanti Policy Secure's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: ivanti.com/company/history/pulse-secure, ivanti.com/de/company/history/pulse-secure, ivanti.com/fr/company/history/pulse-secure, ivanti.com/it/company/history/pulse-secure, ivanti.com/es/company/history/pulse-secure. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Ivanti Policy Secure'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 Ivanti Policy Secure, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Ivanti Policy Secure by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: