Index › Products › NACVIEW · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

NACVIEW

2Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

2 / 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.

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. NACVIEW was named 1 time in NAC, where Portnox Cloud led with 35%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business57 of 91

under the label threshold

Mid-market96 of 111

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In nac · 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 NACVIEW 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
Network access control	Network and edge	0%	96 of 111	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Portnox Cloud at 35%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for NACVIEW yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated NACVIEW across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Negative	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	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 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.

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.

“Genian NAC or NACVIEW (free tiers for ~100-250 devices), but they cap scale and may upsell.” Grok 4.1 Fast · NAC · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as NACVIEW, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and NACVIEW was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

PacketFence2 of 21Not among the top eight

Portnox CLEAR1 of 21Not among the top eight

Aruba ClearPass1 of 20Not among the top eight

Cisco ISE1 of 20Not among the top eight

Fortinet FortiNAC1 of 20Not among the top eight

FreeNAC1 of 20Not among the top eight

Genian NAC1 of 20Not among the top eight

LiteManager1 of 20Not among the top eight

OPSWAT MetaAccess1 of 20Not among the top eight

OpenNAC1 of 20Not among the top eight

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 NACVIEW. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named NACVIEW and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

capterra.com2

cyberpress.org2

esecurityplanet.com2

itechguides.com2

thectoclub.com2

us.fitgap.com2

cisco.getuniqcli.com1

comparitech.com1

cybersecuritynews.com1

devopsschool.com1

No domain is on file for NACVIEW, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

cyberpress.org/nac-solutions-by-business-size2

esecurityplanet.com/products/network-access-control-solutions2

itechguides.com/best/network-access-control-software2

thectoclub.com/tools/best-network-access-control-software2

packetfence.com/1

capterra.com/network-access-control-software/s/free1

capterra.com/network-access-control-software/s/small-businesses1

cisco.getuniqcli.com/resources/cisco-ise-alternatives-compared1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow NACVIEW

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 NACVIEW'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 NACVIEW, 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 NACVIEW by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where NACVIEW 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 NACVIEW, 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.