Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 61 → 21 of 58
5 categories · RankedLogicGate
99Judge labels
4First choices
20Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
5Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
3% in GRC for mid-market buyers
Rank 8 of 75 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
2 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 5% of its 22 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of LogicGate →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business19 of 60
0%15 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market8 of 75
3%22 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise11 of 67
2%16 labels
accepted challenger
In grc · 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 LogicGate 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRC platforms | Security operations | 3% | 8 of 75 | 5% | 22 | accepted challenger | ▼−7Since September 2026: 11% → 4%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Third-party risk management | Security operations | 2% | 8 of 87 | 10% | 10 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Compliance automation | Security operations | 0% | 16 of 67 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Drata at 34% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Cyber risk quantification | Security operations | 0% | 109 of 116 | 50% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by CyberSaint CyberStrong at 25% | |
| Business continuity management | Security operations | 0% | 74 of 114 | 33% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by LogicManager at 24% |
Movement
Since September 2026, LogicGate held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · GRC · by segment
Mid-market▼−7Since September 2026: 11% → 4%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 11% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 4 → 7 of 69
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 13 → 10 of 65
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRC | 11% | 4% | ▼−7Since September 2026: 11% → 4%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 8 of 75 |
| TPRM | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 17 → 8 of 87 |
| Compliance automation | 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 30 → 16 of 67 |
| Cyber risk quant | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 109 of 116, unchanged |
| Business continuity | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 74 of 114, unchanged |
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 LogicGate 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 LogicGate 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 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
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
Direct16 labels3
Paraphrase6 labelsNone
Comparative26 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained11 labels1
Scale-constrained15 labelsNone
Negative25 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative99 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 5 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.
“LogicGate: Best for organizations that need customizable workflows and AI-driven insights to automate vendor onboarding, risk scoring, and remediation playbooks.” Llama 4 Maverick · TPRM · direct prompt · first choice
“If you want the best balance of capability + usability + mid-market fit, start with LogicGate.” GPT-5.4 mini · GRC · direct prompt · first choice
“For broader GRC (risk + audit + governance): LogicGate or ZenGRC—configurable without coding.” Grok 4.20 · GRC · direct prompt · first choice
“Consider modern alternatives — Newer platforms (LogicGate, Onspring, Drata, Vanta) trade some depth for faster time-to-value” Kimi K2 · GRC · 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.
“Risk assessment capabilities are largely qualitative rather than quantitative, heavy reliance on customer-defined workflows can lead to inconsistent practices” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Cyber risk quant · negative prompt · soft negative
“massive GRC platforms (e.g., ServiceNow, Archer, MetricStream, LogicGate)... lack the intuitive features required for emergency responders” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Business continuity · negative prompt · soft negative
“good platforms, but typically positioned for larger programs and higher price points” GPT-5.4 mini · GRC · budget prompt · soft negative
“powerful but start at $10K+/year, so skip unless scaling up” Grok 4.20 · Cyber risk quant · budget prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LogicGate, over the 99 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LogicGate was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LogicGate, over the 99 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LogicGate 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 LogicGate. 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 96 of the 99 answers that named LogicGate and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
vanta.com39
complyjet.com32
metricstream.com32
g2.com29
orbiqhq.com29
surecloud.com29
expertinsights.com24
learn.g2.com24
gartner.com23
riskwatch.com23
284 of the 284 domain citations in answers naming LogicGate came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
logicgate.ai is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, LogicGate takes 3% of first choices and Hyperproof takes 19%.ShowHide
Search and answers
logicgate.ai is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, LogicGate takes 3% of first choices and Hyperproof takes 19%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “grc platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “grc platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 18,100 a month (“logicgate”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 70 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 421 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 286 · 15 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 1,100
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
3%
rank 8 of 75 in GRC
Segment leader
19%
Hyperproof
- First choices
- 4 across its categories
- Named in
- 99 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 96 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 logicgate.ai
1,389
subdomains included
Content
773
counted in the table below
Documentation
122
Product · Integration
73 · 263
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 366 | 27 | 2026-09-24 | ||
| News or press | 226 | 10 | 2026-09-24 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 56 | 0 | 2026-05-29 | ||
| Report or ebook | 45 | 0 | 2026-05-29 | ||
| Conference or event | 26 | 4 | 2026-09-25 | ||
| Case study | 18 | 0 | 2026-06-09 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 13 | 1 | 2026-08-05 | ||
| Podcast or video | 13 | 0 | 2022-09-12 | ||
| Comparison | 7 | 0 | 2025-03-05 | ||
| Template or tool | 3 | 0 | 2025-06-13 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-25Cyber risk management agents wbr conference or event
- 2026-09-245 grc trends reshaping hospitality retail blog
- 2026-09-24Strong fundamentals make next gen security possible news or press
- 2026-09-22Why you cant vibe code a holistic grc program blog
- 2026-09-21How to manage ai risks a practical framework blog
- 2026-09-18Logicgate named a leader in the idc marketscape for third party risk management software blog
Events in person
Last twelve months
- June 2, 2026 to June 3, 2026Agility UKBankside Hotel, London · took part
- May 12, 2026 to May 13, 2026Agility 2026 conferenceThe Westin Chicago River North, Chicago · took part
As the event pages on logicgate.ai state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page logicgate.ai 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 LogicGate
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as LogicGate; a claim can dispute any of them.
LogicGate (Risk Cloud) 4
Follow LogicGate
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
LogicGate is its own company.ShowHide
The company
LogicGate is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- AI GRC Platform for the Enterprise
- For
- enterprise
- Price stated
- Custom enterprise pricing, request a demo for details. logicgate.ai
- Starting price
- 0 logicgate.ai
- Integrations claimed
- 200 logicgate.ai
- Certifications
- FedRAMPGartner Magic Quadrant for GRC Tools, Assurance LeadersThe Forrester Wave™: Third-Party Risk Management Platforms, Q1 2026The Forrester Wave™: Governance, Risk, And Compliance Platforms, Q2 2026SOC 2ISOSIGCertified Implementer
- Customers named
- Luno
- Not stated on the pages read
- Free plan or trial, hosting
What LogicGate's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: logicgate.ai, logicgate.ai/trust, logicgate.ai/platform, logicgate.ai/tag/customer-stories, logicgate.ai/company/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 LogicGate'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 LogicGate, 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 LogicGate by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where LogicGate 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 LogicGate, 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.