Every category where a model named Noname Security 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
API security platforms	Security operations	6%	8 of 93	43%	14	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Noname Security 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 Noname Security 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	1	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	0	0	0	2
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	0	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	1	1
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	0	1	0	1

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

Direct5 labels2

Paraphrase6 labels2

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative34 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.

“For most mid-market B2B companies, I'd recommend starting with Noname (Akamai API Security)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · API security · direct prompt · first choice

“For pure API Security & Visibility: Go with Noname Security.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · API security · direct prompt · first choice

“this is the market leader for mid-to-large organizations” Qwen 3.7 Flash · API security · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Comprehensive discovery/protection; balances visibility without huge investments” Grok 4.1 Fast · API security · direct 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.

“Criticized for long setup times, limited remediation guidance... Some experts consider it less effective compared to newer agentless approaches” Mistral Small · API security · negative prompt · hard negative

“This is the most frequently criticized major vendor in the space.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · API security · negative prompt · hard negative

“Post-acquisition integration still in progress; some pre-acquisition roadmap features delayed; product now bundled with Akamai's broader portfolio” Kimi K2 · API security · negative prompt · soft negative

“Akamai acquired Noname Security in June 2024... If either is on your shortlist, confirm the product's current roadmap” GPT-6 Luna · API security · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Noname Security, over the 34 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Noname Security was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Salt Security27 of 345Compare →

Akamai API Security20 of 343Compare →

Traceable AI14 of 340Compare →

Imperva API Security13 of 340Not among the top eight

Wallarm API Security11 of 341Compare →

Cloudflare API Shield10 of 340Not among the top eight

42Crunch9 of 341Compare →

StackHawk7 of 340Compare →

Kong Gateway6 of 341Not among the top eight

Cequence Unified API Protection6 of 340Not 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 Noname Security. 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 27 of the 34 answers that named Noname Security and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

radware.com18

learn.g2.com16

expertinsights.com13

g2.com13

akamai.com11

axis-intelligence.com10

beaglesecurity.com9

rfp.wiki9

ciopages.com8

escape.tech8

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

Pages cited

learn.g2.com/best-api-security-tools16

radware.com/cyberpedia/application-security/choosing-api-security-solutions14

expertinsights.com/application-security/the-top-api-security-tools13

g2.com/categories/api-security11

axis-intelligence.com/best-api-security-tools-2026-tested-guide10

radware.com/cyberpedia/application-security/api-security-platforms10

beaglesecurity.com/blog/article/best-api-security-solutions-enterprises.html8

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/api-security8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Noname Security stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 390 a month (“noname security”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 7 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 8 of 93 in API security

Segment leader

12%

Aikido Security

First choices: 4 across its categories
Named in: 34 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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 Noname Security

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

Noname Security (now part of Akamai) 2Noname Security (by Cyera) 1Noname Security (now Akamai API Security) 1Noname Security / Akamai 1

Follow Noname Security

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

where Noname Security 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 Noname Security, 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.