Every category where a model named ManageEngine 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
Patch management	IT operations and endpoint	4%	7 of 87	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by Action1 at 27%
Unified endpoint management	IT operations and endpoint	2%	7 of 52	9%	11	accepted challenger
Privileged access management	Identity and access	0%	69 of 74	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by ManageEngine PAM360 at 21%
Vulnerability management platforms	Security operations	0%	64 of 80	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by Rapid7 InsightVM at 45%
Data loss prevention	Security operations	0%	80 of 84	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview DLP at 39%
Endpoint protection	IT operations and endpoint	0%	83 of 99	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Cloud at 22%
Infrastructure monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	59 of 65	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Site24x7 at 24%
Remote monitoring and management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	32 of 57	0%	1	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 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 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	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	2	1	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1	2
Mistral Small	0	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	0	1	3
Llama 4 Maverick	3	1	2	2	8
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	2	0	1	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	2	0	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

Direct7 labels2

Paraphrase5 labels1

Comparative12 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained15 labelsNone

Negative22 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative65 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 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.

“The best OS and third-party patching solution for a mid-sized B2B company would be ManageEngine, Syxsense, or Heimdal.” Llama 4 Maverick · Patching · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“The best unified endpoint management platform for a mid-market B2B company is ManageEngine” Llama 4 Maverick · UEM · direct prompt · first choice

“Some of the top contenders include ManageEngine, Syxsense, and Heimdal.” Llama 4 Maverick · Patching · direct prompt · first choice

“Other transparent mid-market options include ManageEngine, Scalefusion, and Miradore” Mistral Small · UEM · paraphrase 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.

“Avoid "Legacy" solutions and vendors with a history of security vulnerabilities (like ManageEngine)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · DLP · negative prompt · hard negative

“95% protection; 19-27 false alarms; operational inefficiencies.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Endpoint protection · negative prompt · hard negative

“ManageEngine, SecPod SanerNow, and Automox handle automated patch deployment well, but "none of them offer patchless protection"” Perplexity Sonar · Vuln management · negative prompt · soft negative

“Typically less deep in advanced controls, analytics, and scale than the enterprise leaders” GPT-5.4 mini · PAM · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ManageEngine, over the 65 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ManageEngine was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

NinjaOne28 of 655Not in the top three

Microsoft Intune27 of 6511Not in the top three

Ivanti22 of 650Not in the top three

Jamf18 of 651Not in the top three

Omnissa Workspace ONE18 of 650Not in the top three

Automox17 of 655Not in the top three

Action112 of 653Not in the top three

Tanium12 of 652Not in the top three

Atera11 of 650Not in the top three

Baramundi9 of 650Not 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. 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 62 of the 65 answers that named ManageEngine and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gbhackers.com31

cyberpress.org28

expertinsights.com23

gartner.com16

syncrosecure.com15

learn.g2.com14

motadata.com12

thectoclub.com12

cybersecuritynews.com11

reddit.com11

173 of the 173 domain citations in answers naming ManageEngine came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gbhackers.com/best-patch-management-compared-215

cyberpress.org/uem-solutions-by-business-size14

gbhackers.com/best-uem-solutions-compared13

cyberpress.org/patch-management-by-business-size-212

syncrosecure.com/blog/unified-endpoint-management-tools12

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/endpoint-management-uem9

motadata.com/blog/best-patch-management-software9

thectoclub.com/tools/best-enterprise-patch-management-software9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as ManageEngine

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as ManageEngine; a claim can dispute any of them.

Manage Engine 1ManageEngine (Endpoint DLP Plus & DataSecurity Plus) 1

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'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, 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.