IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › ManageEngine RMM Central · September 2026 Edition

ManageEngine · 1 category · Named, not ranked

ManageEngine RMM Central

7Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. ManageEngine RMM Central was named 3 times in RMM, where NinjaOne led with 50%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business13 of 45

under the label threshold

Mid-market16 of 57

under the label threshold

Enterprise14 of 58

under the label threshold

In rmm · 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 ManageEngine RMM Central 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
Remote monitoring and management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	16 of 57	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by NinjaOne at 50%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Best for Hybrid Infrastructure ... evaluate ManageEngine RMM Central or Atera respectively” Kimi K2 · RMM · direct prompt · alternative

“Hybrid cloud/on-prem Windows Server monitoring | ManageEngine RMM Central” Kimi K2 · RMM · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best for: Hybrid deployments (Windows Server, AWS, Azure).” Mistral Small · RMM · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ManageEngine RMM Central, over the 7 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ManageEngine RMM Central was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

NinjaOne6 of 75Not in the top three

Atera6 of 71Not in the top three

Syncro5 of 70Not in the top three

N-able N-central4 of 72Not in the top three

Datto RMM4 of 70Not in the top three

ConnectWise RMM3 of 71Not in the top three

Kaseya VSA3 of 70Not in the top three

N-able N-sight3 of 70Not in the top three

SuperOps3 of 70Not in the top three

Acronis Cyber Protect2 of 70Not 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 ManageEngine RMM Central. 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 7 of the 7 answers that named ManageEngine RMM Central and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

syncrosecure.com5

aimultiple.com4

comparitech.com4

learn.g2.com4

expertinsights.com3

superops.com3

worldmetrics.org3

blog.domotz.com2

connectwise.com2

g2.com2

Thirty-two of the thirty-two domain citations in answers naming ManageEngine RMM Central came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

aimultiple.com/rmm-software4

comparitech.com/net-admin/rmm-software-and-tools4

learn.g2.com/best-rmm-software4

syncrosecure.com/blog/best-rmm-software4

expertinsights.com/it-management/the-top-rmm-solutions-for-msps3

superops.com/best-rmm-software-and-tools3

g2.com/categories/remote-monitoring-management-rmm/enterprise2

gbhackers.com/best-rmm-platforms-for-msps-a-complete-comparison-guide2

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 ManageEngine RMM Central'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 ManageEngine RMM Central, 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 manageengine.com 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.