| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SD-WAN | Network and edge | 2% | 8 of 73 | 17% | 35 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| SASE platforms | Network and edge | 0% | 35 of 45 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Cato Networks at 35% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SD-WAN | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 13 → 8 of 73 |
| SASE | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 35 of 45, unchanged |
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 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Prisma SD-WAN is the best pick if you're an enterprise team that wants cloud-delivered, application-aware routing tied to unified Prisma SASE security governance” Muse Glimmer 30B · SD-WAN · comparative prompt · first choice
“my default recommendation would be Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN” GPT-5.4 mini · SD-WAN · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“If you are a cloud-first enterprise prioritizing deep application visibility, AIOps, and premium cloud security, choose Palo Alto Networks.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SD-WAN · comparative prompt · alternative
“Prisma SD-WAN is best for SASE-aligned modernization with AI-assisted path steering and cloud-first architecture” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SD-WAN · comparative 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.
“Avoid ... Prisma SD-WAN due to quality, support, or flexibility concerns.” Mistral Small · SD-WAN · negative prompt · hard negative
“Prisma SD-WAN is also mentioned as a platform to avoid” Llama 4 Maverick · SD-WAN · negative prompt · hard negative
“strong products, but they skew more toward enterprise or converged SASE use cases than a straightforward mid-market recommendation” Perplexity Sonar · SD-WAN · direct prompt · soft negative
“multiple sources flag higher pricing and note that its SD-WAN and on-prem security capabilities can be hard to balance” Perplexity Sonar · SD-WAN · 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 101 of the 108 answers that named Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN and are not a share of its labels.
355 of the 385 domain citations in answers naming Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN 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 Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: docs.paloaltonetworks.com/prisma-sd-wan, docs.paloaltonetworks.com/prisma/cloudgenix-sd-wan, docs.paloaltonetworks.com/prisma-sd-wan/cloudblades, paloaltonetworks.com/sase/prisma-sd-wan-vs-legacy, docs.paloaltonetworks.com/prisma-sd-wan/release-notes. 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 Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN'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 Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN, 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 Palo Alto Networks Prisma SD-WAN by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: