Small business▲+3Since September 2026: 7% → 10%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
10%from 7% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 3 → 2 of 76
ManageEngine · 1 category · RankedManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus
79Judge labels
10First choices
7Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
9% in Vuln management for small business buyers
Rank 5 of 77 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 10% of its 29 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business2 of 82
9%31 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market5 of 77
7%29 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise6 of 68
2%13 labels
accepted challenger
In vuln management · 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 Vulnerability Manager Plus 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vulnerability management platforms | Security operations | 7% | 5 of 77 | 10% | 29 | accepted challenger | ▼−1Since September 2026: 9% → 8%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Vuln management · by segment
Mid-market▼−1Since September 2026: 9% → 8%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
8%from 9% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 3 → 5 of 74
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 54 → 6 of 62
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vuln management | 9% | 8% | ▼−1Since September 2026: 9% → 8%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 5 of 77 |
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 ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus 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 ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus 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 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
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 labels1
Paraphrase12 labels2
Comparative17 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained16 labels6
Scale-constrained5 labels1
Negative13 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative79 labels in all, every segment counted; 10 of the 12 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.
“the most practical recommendation from the results because it is repeatedly positioned as suitable for budget-conscious teams” Perplexity Sonar · Vuln management · budget prompt · first choice
“I would recommend ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus ... is the safest fit for a mid-sized B2B company” Perplexity Sonar · Vuln management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Vuln management · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“ManageEngine or Intruder are solid choices for SMBs” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Vuln management · budget 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.
“The vulnerability intelligence falls behind security-first platforms, with risk scoring lacking threat intelligence depth” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Vuln management · negative prompt · soft negative
“noted for their automated patch deployment, but they also do not offer patchless protection” Mistral Small · Vuln management · negative prompt · soft negative
“Limited native remediation options compared to others.” Mistral Small · Vuln management · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, over the 78 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, over the 78 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus 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 ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus. 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 78 of the 78 answers that named ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
vicarius.io52
techrepublic.com41
comparitech.com38
orca.security36
riskwatch.com35
axis-intelligence.com31
pdq.com29
motadata.com27
expertinsights.com26
g2.com26
341 of the 341 domain citations in answers naming ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 90 a month (“manageengine vulnerability manager plus”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 3 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on ManageEngine's site (manageengine.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
7%
rank 5 of 77 in vuln management
Segment leader
30%
Rapid7 InsightVM
- First choices
- 10 across its categories
- Named in
- 78 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 78 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.
Names read as ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus; a claim can dispute any of them.
ManageEngine 4ManageEngine (Vulnerability Manager Plus) 1ManageEngine / Motadata ServiceOps 1ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus (VMP) 1Manageengine 1
Follow ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus
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
ManageEngine is the company behind ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus.ShowHide
The company
ManageEngine is the company behind ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Prioritization-focused enterprise vulnerability management
- Price stated
- Free Trial manageengine.com/vulnerability-management/vulnerability-assessment-software.html
- Free plan or trial
- Free Trial manageengine.com/vulnerability-management/vulnerability-assessment-software.html
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: manageengine.com/vulnerability-management/vulnerability-assessment-software.html, manageengine.com/network-configuration-manager/network-vulnerability-scanner.html, manageengine.com/key-manager/tools/vulnerability-scanner.html, manageengine.com/br/network-configuration-manager/network-vulnerability-scanner.html, manageengine.com/fr/network-configuration-manager/network-vulnerability-scanner.html. 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 ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus'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 Vulnerability Manager Plus, 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 ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus 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 ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, 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.