| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identity governance | Identity and access | 12% | 2 of 76 | 4% | 24 | accepted challenger | ▼−7Since September 2026: 20% → 13%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| SaaS management platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 23 of 64 | 27% | 11 | criticized challenger | |
| Non-human identity management | Identity and access | 0% | 68 of 128 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by JumpCloud at 14% | |
| Enterprise browsers | Security operations | 0% | 55 of 80 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Google Password Manager at 26% | |
| SaaS security posture management | Security operations | 0% | 69 of 95 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wing Security at 30% |
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IGA | 20% | 13% | ▼−7Since September 2026: 20% → 13%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 → 2 of 76 |
| SaaS management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 23 of 64, unchanged |
| NHI management | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 68 of 128, unchanged |
| Enterprise browsers | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 55 of 80, unchanged |
| SSPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 69 of 95, 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
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 2 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 9 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Lumos is best for mid-market companies focused on automating access requests and approvals across SaaS apps” Muse Glimmer 30B · IGA · direct prompt · first choice
“Zluri, Lumos, ConductorOne — Built for mid-market; faster deployments ($), lower administrative burden” Qwen 3.7 Flash · IGA · scale prompt · first choice
“the best identity governance platform is usually Lumos if you want the fastest path to value” Perplexity Sonar · IGA · direct prompt · first choice
“If your top priority is cutting SaaS costs while getting SOC 2 ready: Go with Lumos.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · IGA · paraphrase prompt · first choice
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.
“mention missing features or limited customization for BetterCloud, Productiv, Lumos, and Zluri” GPT-5.4 mini · SaaS management · negative prompt · soft negative
“Lumos is massive feature overkill and will cost you far more than you need to spend.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SaaS management · negative prompt · soft negative
“Caution for Hard-Compliance Environments... Feature gaps for legacy/on-prem systems” Gemini 3.5 Flash · IGA · negative prompt · soft negative
“users report significant integration issues” Kimi K2 · SaaS management · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 80 of the 84 answers that named Lumos and are not a share of its labels.
204 of the 245 domain citations in answers naming Lumos came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 205 | 7 | 2026-09-22 | ||
| Report or ebook | 19 | 0 | 2025-11-01 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 17 | 0 | 2025-07-28 | ||
| Comparison | 14 | 3 | 2026-07-14 | ||
| Template or tool | 9 | 0 | 2026-01-14 | ||
| Conference or event | 1 | 0 | 2026-02-24 | ||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Every page lumos.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.
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.
What Lumos's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: lumos.com, lumos.com/pricing, trust.lumos.com, lumos.com/products/albus, lumos.com/customers. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Lumos'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 Lumos, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Lumos by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
Lumos is among the products AI models recommend first in Identity governance this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.