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 55 → 68 of 71
2 categories · RankedMandiant
26Judge labels
1First choices
7Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
2Categories
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 PTaaS for enterprise buyers
Rank 82 of 82 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 50% of its 4 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business74 of 76
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market82 of 82
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise6 of 67
2%15 labels
accepted challenger
In ptaas · 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 Mandiant 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Penetration testing as a service | Security operations | 0% | 82 of 82 | 50% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Cobalt at 45% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 45 of 55 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint at 30% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Mandiant held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · PTaaS · by segment
Mid-market=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 46 → 74 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 11 → 6 of 63
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PTaaS | 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 46 → 82 of 82 |
| EDR | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 45 of 55, 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
By model
How each model treated Mandiant 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 Mandiant 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 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 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
Direct8 labels1
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative11 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 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.
No positive label carried a quote.
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 pure enterprise giants (e.g., Mandiant, Rapid7) which can be pricier/slower” Grok 4.20 · PTaaS · direct prompt · hard negative
“Treat FireEye/Mandiant-era EDR comments cautiously... "Never use FireEye's EDR," but that is also anecdotal and dated” Perplexity Sonar · EDR · negative prompt · soft negative
“They rarely have the budget for premier enterprise consultancies (like Mandiant or CrowdStrike)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · PTaaS · direct prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Mandiant, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Mandiant was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Mandiant, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Mandiant 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 Mandiant. 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 24 of the 26 answers that named Mandiant and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
underdefense.com17
deepstrike.io13
synack.com13
getastra.com12
techrepublic.com12
beaglesecurity.com8
softwaresecured.com8
stingrai.io8
gartner.com7
scnsoft.com7
105 of the 105 domain citations in answers naming Mandiant came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cloud.google.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Mandiant takes 0% of first choices and Cobalt takes 45%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cloud.google.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Mandiant takes 0% of first choices and Cobalt takes 45%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “penetration testing service”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “penetration testing services”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 6,600 a month (“mandiant”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 253 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 7,405,347 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 70,320 · 16,032 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 201,334
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 82 of 82 in ptaas
Segment leader
45%
Cobalt
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 26 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 24 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 cloud.google.com
79
subdomains included
Content
67
counted in the table below
Documentation
6
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 37 | 14 | 2026-09-28 | API management | |
| Case study | 19 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 4 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 2 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 2 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 1 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 1 | undated | |||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28Storage optimized z4d vm and bare metal instances blog
- 2026-09-28Accelerate geospatial coding with ai in google earth engine blog
- 2026-09-25Storage intelligence advisor and batch operations updates blog
- 2026-09-25Memorystore for valkey 9 1 3x qps caching blog
- 2026-09-252026 gartner magic quadrant for container management blog
- 2026-09-24Gemini 3 8 live with live avatar is now generally available blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page cloud.google.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 Mandiant
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Mandiant; a claim can dispute any of them.
FireEye/Mandiant 1
Follow Mandiant
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 Mandiant'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 Mandiant, 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 Mandiant by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Mandiant 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 Mandiant, 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.