IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Kaspersky · September 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

Kaspersky

14Judge labels

0First choices

12Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

3Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

7 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Kaspersky was named 7 times in Endpoint protection and 2 other categories, where Microsoft Defender for Cloud led with 22%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business87 of 89

under the label threshold

Mid-market99 of 99

under the label threshold

Enterprise80 of 82

under the label threshold

In endpoint protection · 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 Kaspersky 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
Endpoint protection	IT operations and endpoint	0%	99 of 99	100%	4	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Cloud at 22%
Threat intelligence platforms	Security operations	0%	126 of 128	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by NordStellar at 13%
Next-generation firewalls	Network and edge	0%	94 of 100	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Fortinet FortiGate at 61%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Kaspersky yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Kaspersky across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	2
Mistral Small	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative14 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“Kaspersky is the main endpoint protection platform that has been explicitly banned and restricted” MiniMax M2.5 · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · hard negative

“Avoid: Kaspersky if you're in the U.S., government, or critical infrastructure.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · hard negative

“are advised to avoid or carefully vet Kaspersky's threat intelligence offerings” Mistral Small · Threat intel · negative prompt · hard negative

“US government bans ... avoid if US-based to comply and prevent detection gaps.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Threat intel · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Kaspersky, over the 14 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Kaspersky was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

SentinelOne7 of 140Not in the top three

Bitdefender6 of 141Not in the top three

CrowdStrike Falcon6 of 140Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint5 of 140Not in the top three

Sophos5 of 140Not in the top three

CrowdStrike4 of 140Not in the top three

Trend Micro4 of 140Not in the top three

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR3 of 140Not in the top three

MISP2 of 141Not in the top three

Bitdefender GravityZone2 of 140Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 Kaspersky. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 11 of the 14 answers that named Kaspersky and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

av-comparatives.org6

rfp.wiki5

cyberpress.org4

g2.com4

gbhackers.com4

gartner.com3

peerspot.com3

reddit.com3

solutionsinsider.com3

venn.com3

Thirty-eight of the thirty-eight domain citations in answers naming Kaspersky came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

av-comparatives.org/tests/endpoint-prevention-response-epr-test-20244

av-comparatives.org/tests/business-security-test-2024-august-november3

av-comparatives.org/tests/endpoint-prevention-response-epr-test-20253

gartner.com/reviews/market/endpoint-protection-platforms3

gbhackers.com/best-business-antivirus-compared3

reddit.com/r/cybersecurity/comments/13exdwa/endpoint_protection_screw_gartner_lets_get_hon3

venn.com/learn/endpoint-security/endpoint-security-solutions3

acsmi.org/blogs/state-of-endpoint-security-2025-original-data-on-solutions-effectiveness2

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Kaspersky'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 Kaspersky, 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 kaspersky.com 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.