Every category where a model named LayerX 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
Enterprise browsers	Security operations	0%	19 of 80	7%	14	accepted challenger
AI security platforms	Security operations	0%	173 of 233	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11%
Client-side protection	Security operations	0%	92 of 120	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by cside at 13%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for LayerX 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 LayerX across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	2	0	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	2	1	4
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	2	0	3
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	1	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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative21 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained9 labels2

Negative5 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative46 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 3 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.

“LayerX uses a browser extension approach to enterprise security rather than a full browser, offering lower deployment friction” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Enterprise browsers · comparative prompt · alternative

“if you need security without forcing a browser swap, LayerX or Seraphic are designed for that model” Perplexity Sonar · Enterprise browsers · comparative prompt · alternative

“some vendors like LayerX and Seraphic add enterprise controls without switching browsers” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Enterprise browsers · budget prompt · alternative

“If you can't force a browser change but need controls: LayerX or Seraphic extensions” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Enterprise browsers · comparative 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.

“several top-tier extensions like LayerX and Seraphic have been acquired by major security vendors ... which has shifted them toward larger enterprise licensing” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Enterprise browsers · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LayerX, over the 46 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LayerX was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Island Enterprise Browser39 of 4622Not among the top eight

Google Password Manager38 of 469Not among the top eight

Microsoft Edge for Business26 of 467Not among the top eight

Seraphic22 of 460Not among the top eight

Prisma Access Browser15 of 463Not among the top eight

Talon11 of 462Not among the top eight

Check Point Harmony Browse10 of 460Not among the top eight

Surf Security9 of 460Not among the top eight

Palo Alto Networks5 of 462Not among the top eight

CrowdStrike Falcon Seraphic5 of 460Not 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 LayerX. 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 46 of the 46 answers that named LayerX and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

venn.com28

cybersecuritynews.com26

expertinsights.com23

island.io23

gbhackers.com22

peerspot.com19

paloaltonetworks.com17

us.fitgap.com17

g2.com16

chromeenterprise.google14

205 of the 205 domain citations in answers naming LayerX came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cybersecuritynews.com/best-enterprise-browsers24

gbhackers.com/best-enterprise-browsers-compared22

expertinsights.com/web-security/the-top-enterprise-browsers19

peerspot.com/categories/enterprise-browsers19

us.fitgap.com/search/browsers/enterprise16

pushsecurity.com/blog/the-top-10-browser-security-solutions-in-202614

venn.com/learn/browser-security/secure-enterprise-browser14

guideflow.com/blog/secure-enterprise-browser12

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

layerxsecurity.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, LayerX takes 0% of first choices and Google Password Manager takes 26%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “enterprise browsers”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “secure enterprise browser”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 1,300 a month (“layerx”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 17 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 1,356 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 507 · 11 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 3,510
Paid Google search: No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

18 ads · 10 text, 5 video, 3 image · 0 shown in the last 30 days

First shown November 2022, as LayerX Security, verified. Ads started 2025-11 to 2026-10: 13 in the year, 5 before.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 19 of 80 in enterprise browsers

Segment leader

26%

Google Password Manager

First choices: 2 across its categories
Named in: 46 answers
Its own site cited: in 46 of the answers that named it

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.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on layerxsecurity.com

4,039

subdomains included

Content

3,022

counted in the table below

Documentation

139

Product · Integration

109 · 3

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	1,411	0	2026-06-29	Microsegmentation, CDN
Glossary or explainer	519	0	2026-06-15	MFA, DLP
News or press	363	0	2026-07-05	Microsegmentation, CDN
Case study	307	undated
Report or ebook	197	0	2026-05-26	Microsegmentation, WAF
Podcast or video	93	undated		SASE, Load balancers
Webinar or virtual event	42	undated		Microsegmentation
Conference or event	40	0	2026-03-15
Comparison	36	0	2026-03-25	API gateways, Enterprise browsers
Template or tool	14	undated		Client-side protection, WAF

Most recent

2026-07-05New bioshocking attack manipulates ai browser into data theft news or press
2026-06-29Bioshocking ai gaming the ai browser and escaping its guardrails blog
2026-06-15What is shadow ai glossary or explainer
2026-06-04Mitre atlas glossary or explainer
2026-06-02Browser agent security risk the layer no one is watching glossary or explainer
2026-06-01Ai risk isnt distributed evenly neither should your security strategy be blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page layerxsecurity.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. Of its titles that name a category, most name microsegmentation (37); 10 name its categories the models place it in. 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 October 5, 2026.

Names read as LayerX

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

LayerX (Akamai) 1

Follow LayerX

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

LayerX is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: AI governance and interaction security for users and agents
layerxsecurity.com
For: security teams
layerxsecurity.com
Free plan or trial: Get a free demo layerxsecurity.com
Certifications: CIS Benchmarks
Customers named: Dun & BradstreetKnowBe4MediaTekAGG LLPSimilarwebWCF InsuranceDeloitte Brazil
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, integrations, hosting

What LayerX's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: layerxsecurity.com, layerxsecurity.com/product, layerxsecurity.com/library/case-studies, layerxsecurity.com/partners. 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 LayerX'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 LayerX, 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 LayerX by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where LayerX 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 LayerX, 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.