| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Third-party risk management | Security operations | 0% | 86 of 87 | 47% | 36 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TPRM | 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 19 → 86 of 87 |
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
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Need a centralized vendor-risk program across the enterprise: OneTrust, ProcessUnity, Archer... OneTrust is a good example of a broader governance platform” GPT-5.4 mini · TPRM · comparative prompt · first choice
“For large enterprises with complex, multi‑domain programs: Consider OneTrust, ServiceNow, Riskonnect, MetricStream, or IBM OpenPages” GLM 4.7 FlashX · TPRM · comparative prompt · alternative
“OneTrust places third-party risk management inside a wider privacy, compliance and governance platform” Claude Haiku 4.5 · TPRM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best if you already use OneTrust for privacy/compliance: OneTrust Vendor Risk Management” GPT-5.4 mini · TPRM · paraphrase prompt · alternative
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.
“You cannot afford a legacy, heavyweight enterprise platform (like Archer or high-end Diligent/OneTrust suites)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · TPRM · scale prompt · hard negative
“Avoid: ... traditional enterprise GRC platforms (OneTrust, etc.)” Kimi K2 · TPRM · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Has limited integration with enterprise risk or operational resilience, and complex implementations frequently require professional services” Claude Haiku 4.5 · TPRM · negative prompt · soft negative
“Complex UI: Difficult navigation and challenging usability ... steep learning curve and interface can overwhelm users” GLM 4.7 FlashX · TPRM · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 114 of the 121 answers that named OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management and are not a share of its labels.
447 of the 447 domain citations in answers naming OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
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.
What OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: onetrust.com/products/third-party-risk-management, onetrust.com/forms/third-party-risk-management-demo, onetrust.com/glossary/third-party-risk-management-tprm, onetrust.com/resources/pdpl-and-third-party-risk-webinar, onetrust.com/resources/optimizing-third-party-risk-webinar. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management'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 OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: