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
GRC platforms	Security operations	11%	4 of 77	0%	15	accepted challenger
Third-party risk management	Security operations	0%	17 of 72	0%	9	under 10 labels · led by UpGuard at 53%
Compliance automation	Security operations	0%	31 of 54	20%	5	under 10 labels · led by Drata at 37%

Movement

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

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

Direct13 labels1

Paraphrase9 labels2

Comparative19 labelsNone

Budget-constrained5 labels1

Scale-constrained9 labels2

Negative12 labels4not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative67 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 10 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.

“shortlist 3–4 from the compliance-automation/mid-market category (Vanta, Drata, Secureframe, LogicGate, and maybe RiskWatch or OneTrust if you have privacy demands)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · GRC · scale prompt · first choice

“For most mid-market B2B companies, LogicGate or ZenGRC are typically the best starting points” GLM 4.7 FlashX · GRC · direct prompt · first choice

“such as SimpleRisk, Hyperproof, or LogicGate. These platforms provide low-cost or open-source options” Llama 4 Maverick · GRC · budget prompt · first choice

“My Top Recommendation: LogicGate or AuditBoard... I'd recommend starting with LogicGate” MiniMax M2.5 · GRC · paraphrase prompt · first choice

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.

“heavy-duty GRCs, though they lack the turn-key automation of Vanta/Drata” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Compliance automation · scale prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LogicGate, over the 67 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.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Vanta46 of 6710Not in the top three

Drata41 of 675Not in the top three

MetricStream34 of 675Not in the top three

Archer34 of 671Not in the top three

AuditBoard32 of 670Not in the top three

ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management30 of 677Not in the top three

Hyperproof28 of 673Not in the top three

OneTrust28 of 672Not in the top three

Sprinto26 of 671Not in the top three

Secureframe22 of 670Not 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 LogicGate. 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 61 of the 67 answers that named LogicGate and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

vanta.com31

expertinsights.com30

orbiqhq.com23

riskonnect.com22

gartner.com16

riskwatch.com16

surecloud.com16

enzuzo.com15

complyjet.com14

optro.ai14

197 of the 197 domain citations in answers naming LogicGate came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

riskonnect.com/best-grc-software-platforms-202619

expertinsights.com/compliance/the-top-governance-risk-compliance-grc-platforms18

orbiqhq.com/compliance-automation/best-grc-software16

enzuzo.com/blog/best-grc-software13

apono.io/blog/top-10-governance-risk-and-compliance-grc-software-solutions12

metricstream.com/blog/top-governance-risk-compliance-grc-tools.html11

bdemerson.com/article/the-best-grc-software-a-practical-evaluation10

expertinsights.com/compliance/the-top-compliance-automation-tools10

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 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.

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 logic.inc 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.