Every category where a model named OPSWAT MetaAccess 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	7%	4 of 111	0%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for OPSWAT MetaAccess 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 OPSWAT MetaAccess 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	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	2	2
Llama 4 Maverick	1	1	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	2	1	0	3
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	0	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

Direct8 labels1

Paraphrase8 labels3

Comparative5 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained3 labels1

Scale-constrained1 label1

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 of the 8 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.

“Portnox Cloud or OPSWAT MetaAccess give you device profiling, posture enforcement and guest/BYOD without standing up dedicated appliances.” Muse Glimmer 30B · NAC · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“OPSWAT MetaAccess - Cited as one of the most accessible entries for small organizations” MiniMax M2.5 · NAC · budget prompt · first choice

“The best network access control solution for a mid-market B2B company is OPSWAT MetaAccess” Llama 4 Maverick · NAC · direct prompt · first choice

“I'd suggest starting with Portnox Cloud or OPSWAT MetaAccess” MiniMax M2.5 · NAC · paraphrase prompt · first choice

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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as OPSWAT MetaAccess, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OPSWAT MetaAccess was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Portnox Cloud16 of 269Compare →

Cisco ISE10 of 261Compare →

SafeConnect10 of 260Not among the top eight

Forescout9 of 260Not among the top eight

Aruba ClearPass8 of 260Compare →

Fortinet FortiNAC7 of 260Not among the top eight

Portnox CLEAR5 of 265Not among the top eight

macmon NAC5 of 260Not among the top eight

Cisco Identity Services Engine3 of 260Not among the top eight

Cisco Meraki3 of 260Not 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 OPSWAT MetaAccess. 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 26 of the 26 answers that named OPSWAT MetaAccess and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cyberpress.org26

us.fitgap.com21

g2.com18

portnox.com14

capterra.com11

comparitech.com11

omr.com11

cloudnuro.ai9

cybersecuritynews.com9

esecurityplanet.com9

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

Pages cited

cyberpress.org/nac-solutions-by-business-size26

us.fitgap.com/search/network-access-control-software/small-business15

us.fitgap.com/search/network-access-control-software13

g2.com/categories/network-access-control-nac/small-business12

comparitech.com/net-admin/network-access-control-software11

omr.com/en/reviews/category/network-access-control-nac11

capterra.com/network-access-control-software/s/small-businesses10

cloudnuro.ai/blog/top-10-network-access-control-nac-solutions-for-zero-trust-implementatio9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

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

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 10 a month (“opswat metaaccess”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 0 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 4 of 111 in NAC

Segment leader

35%

Portnox Cloud

First choices: 6 across its categories
Named in: 26 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 OPSWAT MetaAccess

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

where OPSWAT MetaAccess 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 OPSWAT MetaAccess, 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.