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 → 14 of 71
3 categories · RankedLogRhythm
58Judge labels
3First choices
22Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in SIEM for mid-market buyers
Rank 11 of 61 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 42% of its 24 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of LogRhythm →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business15 of 79
0%5 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market11 of 61
2%24 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise12 of 61
2%21 labels
criticized challenger
In siem · 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 LogRhythm 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIEM platforms | Security operations | 2% | 11 of 61 | 42% | 24 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Insider risk management | Security operations | 0% | 63 of 84 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management at 22% | |
| Log management | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 68 of 73 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Datadog Log Management at 28% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, LogRhythm held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · SIEM · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 8 → 11 of 55
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 45 → 9 of 51
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIEM | 2% | 2% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 11 of 61 |
| Insider risk | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 63 of 84, unchanged |
| Logs | 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 40 → 68 of 73 |
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 LogRhythm 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 LogRhythm 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 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
Direct10 labels1
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative16 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained3 labels2
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative22 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative58 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 4 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.
“LogRhythm NextGen SIEM ⭐ (Best Overall for Mid-Market)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · SIEM · direct prompt · first choice
“Mid-market, ease of use ... straightforward, user-friendly platform with strong automation.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · SIEM · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“For a more traditional but user-friendly SIEM, LogRhythm is highly regarded.” Mistral Small · SIEM · direct prompt · alternative
“Otherwise, LogRhythm or Exabeam are excellent mid-market choices” MiniMax M2.5 · SIEM · direct 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.
“Another platform that users advise staying away from, citing concerns about both performance and usability.” Mistral Small · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Acquired by Exabeam (July 2024), no longer an independent vendor ... will likely be sunset” Kimi K2 · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid LogRhythm if you are looking for a modern, cloud-native SaaS SIEM.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SIEM · negative prompt · hard negative
“"Stay away from LogRhythm if you care about your mental sanity and money."” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Logs · negative prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LogRhythm, over the 58 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LogRhythm was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LogRhythm, over the 58 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LogRhythm 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 LogRhythm. 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 52 of the 58 answers that named LogRhythm and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
exabeam.comYour site27
underdefense.com27
xoomar.com18
expertinsights.com16
paloaltonetworks.com14
panther.com14
reddit.com14
manageengine.com12
subrosacyber.com11
microsoft.com10
136 of the 163 domain citations in answers naming LogRhythm came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
exabeam.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, LogRhythm takes 2% of first choices and Microsoft Sentinel takes 38%.ShowHide
Search and answers
exabeam.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, LogRhythm takes 2% of first choices and Microsoft Sentinel takes 38%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “siem platform”
7
Position for “siem platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,900 a month (“logrhythm”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 45 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 66,723 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 9,530 · 890 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 6,355
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 11 of 61 in SIEM
Segment leader
38%
Microsoft Sentinel
- First choices
- 3 across its categories
- Named in
- 58 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 52 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 exabeam.com
4,469
subdomains included
Content
1,502
counted in the table below
Documentation
2,424
Product · Integration
23 · 10
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 867 | 21 | 2026-09-24 | SIEM, XDR | |
| Podcast or video | 217 | 4 | 2026-09-23 | SIEM, Logs | |
| Report or ebook | 175 | 10 | 2026-09-16 | SIEM, XDR | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 84 | 6 | 2026-09-15 | SIEM, XDR | |
| Comparison | 61 | 1 | 2026-07-23 | SIEM, XDR | |
| Glossary or explainer | 37 | 2 | 2026-08-28 | SIEM, DLP | |
| Case study | 35 | 3 | 2026-09-22 | ||
| Template or tool | 14 | 0 | 2024-03-06 | SIEM | |
| News or press | 8 | 5 | 2026-09-23 | SIEM | |
| Conference or event | 4 | 0 | 2023-06-21 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-24The first government breach by an ai agent wont be the last blog
- 2026-09-23Complacency kills why more discomfort might fix your burnout podcast or video
- 2026-09-23Exabeam accelerates global channel momentum as exabeam apex partner program drives measurable growth news or press
- 2026-09-22Ga technologies case study
- 2026-09-18The player coach ciso engineering trust in ai agents with open source tools podcast or video
- 2026-09-17What openais misalignment reports tell security teams about ai agents blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page exabeam.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. 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 LogRhythm
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as LogRhythm; a claim can dispute any of them.
LogRhythm NextGen SIEM 2Logrythm 1
Follow LogRhythm
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 LogRhythm'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 LogRhythm, 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 LogRhythm by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where LogRhythm 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 LogRhythm, 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.