Index › Products › Laminar · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Laminar

16Judge labels

0First choices

4Negative labels

7 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Laminar was named 5 times in DSPM, where Microsoft Purview led with 18%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business29 of 127

under the label threshold

Mid-market105 of 105

under the label threshold

Enterprise28 of 72

under the label threshold

In dspm · 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 Laminar 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
Data security posture management	Security operations	0%	105 of 105	60%	5	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview at 18%

Movement

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

By model

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

ShowHide

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	2	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	2	0	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative16 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.

“Higher setup costs, enterprise-oriented” Kimi K2 · DSPM · budget prompt · hard negative

“Laminar | Rubrik | 2024 | Product integration uncertainty” Kimi K2 · DSPM · negative prompt · soft negative

“be cautious about buying into these newly absorbed platforms” Gemini 3.5 Flash · DSPM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Laminar, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Laminar was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Wiz11 of 163Not among the top eight

Cyera10 of 163Not among the top eight

BigID10 of 160Not among the top eight

Sentra8 of 161Not among the top eight

Varonis Data Security Platform8 of 160Not among the top eight

Microsoft Purview5 of 161Not among the top eight

Rubrik5 of 160Not among the top eight

Dig Security4 of 160Not among the top eight

Flow Security4 of 160Not among the top eight

CrowdStrike3 of 160Not among the top eight

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 Laminar. 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 14 of the 16 answers that named Laminar and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

forcepoint.com10

cyberpress.org8

cpl.thalesgroup.com7

startupstash.com7

aimultiple.com6

cybersecuritynews.com6

gartner.com6

orca.security6

strac.io6

gbhackers.com5

No domain is on file for Laminar, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

cyberpress.org/dspm-tools-by-business-size-28

forcepoint.com/blog/insights/top-dspm-vendors7

startupstash.com/best-data-security-posture-management-tools7

aimultiple.com/dspm-vendors6

gartner.com/reviews/market/data-security-posture-management6

orca.security/resources/cloud-security-learning/best-dspm-tools6

cpl.thalesgroup.com/insights/data-security/best-dspm-solutions-enterprise-data-security5

gbhackers.com/best-dspm-compared5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Laminar stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 4,400 a month (“laminar”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 2,584 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 105 of 105 in DSPM

Segment leader

18%

Microsoft Purview

First choices: 0 across its categories
Named in: 16 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

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.

Names read as Laminar

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Laminar; a claim can dispute any of them.

Rubrik/Laminar 1

Follow Laminar

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.

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 Laminar'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 Laminar, 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 Laminar by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Laminar 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 Laminar, 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.