IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › PhishingBox · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

PhishingBox

5Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. PhishingBox was named 2 times in Awareness training, where KnowBe4 led with 42%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business22 of 50

under the label threshold

Mid-market59 of 65

under the label threshold

Enterprise40 of 44

under the label threshold

In awareness training · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named PhishingBox 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
Security awareness training	Security operations	0%	59 of 65	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by KnowBe4 at 42%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for PhishingBox yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated PhishingBox across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0

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

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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.

“Be Cautious About PhishingBox – it's a niche, low-feature vendor with minimal third-party validation.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Awareness training · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as PhishingBox, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and PhishingBox was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

KnowBe43 of 52Not in the top three

Hoxhunt3 of 50Not in the top three

Infosec IQ2 of 51Not in the top three

Arctic Wolf Managed Security Awareness2 of 50Not in the top three

Barracuda2 of 50Not in the top three

GoPhish2 of 50Not in the top three

IRONSCALES2 of 50Not in the top three

Proofpoint ZenGuide2 of 50Not in the top three

Adaptive Security1 of 50Not in the top three

Cisco1 of 50Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 PhishingBox. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 5 of the 5 answers that named PhishingBox and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

expertinsights.com4

g2.com3

gartner.com3

hoxhunt.com3

adaptivesecurity.com2

brside.com2

cipherssecurity.com2

consilien.com2

guideflow.com2

infosecinstitute.com2

Twenty-five of the twenty-five domain citations in answers naming PhishingBox came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/security-awareness-computer-based-training3

adaptivesecurity.com/blog/cybersecurity-awareness-training-platform-challenges2

cipherssecurity.com/best-phishing-simulation-tools-20262

consilien.com/news/best-phishing-simulation-training-platforms-20262

expertinsights.com/security-awareness-training/the-top-alternatives-to-knowbe42

expertinsights.com/security-awareness-training/the-top-phishing-awareness-training-and-sim2

expertinsights.com/security-awareness-training/the-top-phishing-simulation-and-testing-sol2

guideflow.com/blog/phishing-simulation-software2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 PhishingBox'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 PhishingBox, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at phishingbox.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.