Every category where a model named MetaCompliance 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
Security awareness training	Security operations	0%	15 of 65	19%	16	accepted challenger

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	2	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	2	0	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	1	0	3
Mistral Small	0	0	2	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	2	0	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

Direct11 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative13 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative10 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative35 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.

“Choose MetaCompliance for automation and compliance-driven personalization” Perplexity Sonar · Awareness training · direct prompt · alternative

“MetaCompliance: Compliance-heavy, scales well (top G2 for mid-size).” Grok 4.1 Fast · Awareness training · direct prompt · alternative

“Best for: Heavily regulated organizations needing compliance workflows” MiniMax M2.5 · Awareness training · comparative prompt · alternative

“frequently selected by organizations that need policy management” Perplexity Sonar · Awareness training · 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.

“users frequently complain about a steep learning curve, overly complicated interface, inadequate reporting features, and limited customization options” Mistral Small · Awareness training · negative prompt · soft negative

“Steep learning curve and overly complicated interface... Inadequate/complicated reporting” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Awareness training · negative prompt · soft negative

“Slower ROI, higher cost, less emphasis on gamification.” Mistral Small · Awareness training · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as MetaCompliance, over the 35 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and MetaCompliance was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

KnowBe435 of 3515Not in the top three

Hoxhunt30 of 3512Not in the top three

Proofpoint ZenGuide28 of 350Not in the top three

SoSafe22 of 350Not in the top three

Infosec IQ15 of 350Not in the top three

Arctic Wolf Managed Security Awareness14 of 351Not in the top three

Huntress Managed Security Awareness Training8 of 351Not in the top three

Cofense PhishMe8 of 350Not in the top three

Adaptive Security7 of 350Not in the top three

NINJIO6 of 350Not 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 MetaCompliance. 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 35 of the 35 answers that named MetaCompliance and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hoxhunt.com31

expertinsights.com27

adaptivesecurity.com23

gartner.com22

learn.g2.com22

g2.com20

brside.com19

usecure.io17

easyllama.com13

knowbe4.com13

207 of the 207 domain citations in answers naming MetaCompliance came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

hoxhunt.com/blog/best-security-awareness-training30

learn.g2.com/best-security-awareness-training-software22

gartner.com/reviews/market/security-awareness-computer-based-training21

expertinsights.com/security-awareness-training/the-top-security-awareness-training-platfor19

expertinsights.com/security-awareness-training/top-security-awareness-content-and-developm18

easyllama.com/blog/best-security-awareness-training-providers13

doozy.live/blog/best-security-awareness-training-platforms12

brside.com/blog/best-cybersecurity-awareness-training-platforms11

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 MetaCompliance'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 MetaCompliance, 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 metacompliance.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.