Every category where a model named Opera 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
Enterprise browsers	Security operations	0%	79 of 80	100%	7	under 10 labels · led by Google Password Manager at 26%

Movement

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative22 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative24 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.

“Browsers like Brave, DuckDuckGo, Firefox, Tor, and Opera were designed primarily for individual privacy, not organizational security” MiniMax M2.5 · Enterprise browsers · negative prompt · hard negative

“Brave, DuckDuckGo, RAV Online Security from ReasonLabs, Opera and others ... these aren't appropriate for enterprises” Muse Glimmer 30B · Enterprise browsers · negative prompt · hard negative

“DuckDuckGo, Opera - Similarly consumer-focused with no centralized management or enterprise-grade controls” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Enterprise browsers · negative prompt · hard negative

“Recommendation: Avoid Opera for handling sensitive corporate data.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Enterprise browsers · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Opera, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Opera was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Brave21 of 240Not among the top eight

Google Password Manager20 of 244Not among the top eight

DuckDuckGo14 of 240Not among the top eight

Island Enterprise Browser11 of 243Not among the top eight

Firefox ESR9 of 240Not among the top eight

Tor7 of 240Not among the top eight

Vivaldi7 of 240Not among the top eight

Edge for Business6 of 241Not among the top eight

Microsoft Edge6 of 241Not among the top eight

Apple Passwords6 of 240Not 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 Opera. 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 23 of the 24 answers that named Opera and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

csoonline.com19

skyhighsecurity.com15

expertinsights.com14

venn.com14

cybersecuritynews.com13

firstanalysis.com11

island.io11

paloaltonetworks.com11

start.paloaltonetworks.com10

g2.com8

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

Pages cited

csoonline.com/article/573875/secure-web-browsers-for-the-enterprise-compared-how-to-pick-t19

skyhighsecurity.com/cybersecurity-atlas/browser-security/what-is-an-enterprise-browser-and13

firstanalysis.com/research/cybersecurity-jan-202611

venn.com/learn/browser-security/enterprise-browsers11

expertinsights.com/web-security/the-top-enterprise-browsers10

start.paloaltonetworks.com/rs/531-OCS-018/images/definitive-guide-to-enterprise-browsers.p10

cybersecuritynews.com/best-enterprise-browsers9

island.io/article/top-secure-browsers-enterprise9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

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

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 165,000 a month (“opera”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 122,025 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 79 of 80 in enterprise browsers

Segment leader

26%

Google Password Manager

First choices: 0 across its categories
Named in: 24 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.

Follow Opera

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

where Opera 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 Opera, 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.