Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 63 → 22 of 69
3 categories · RankedPrevalent
63Judge labels
4First choices
7Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in TPRM for mid-market buyers
Rank 3 of 87 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 9% of its 22 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Prevalent →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business31 of 71
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market3 of 87
4%22 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise6 of 72
4%29 labels
accepted challenger
In tprm · 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 Prevalent 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Third-party risk management | Security operations | 4% | 3 of 87 | 9% | 22 | accepted challenger | ▲+3Since September 2026: 2% → 5%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| GRC platforms | Security operations | 0% | 51 of 75 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Hyperproof at 19% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| SaaS security posture management | Security operations | 0% | 75 of 95 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wing Security at 30% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Prevalent held within the floor in all three categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · TPRM · by segment
Mid-market▲+3Since September 2026: 2% → 5%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
5%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 8 → 3 of 82
Enterprise▲+2Since September 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 7 → 6 of 68
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TPRM | 2% | 5% | ▲+3Since September 2026: 2% → 5%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 3 of 87 |
| GRC | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 51 of 75, unchanged |
| SSPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 75 of 95, 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
By model
How each model treated Prevalent across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Prevalent 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 | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
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
Direct11 labelsNone
Paraphrase13 labels3
Comparative21 labels4not counted in share
Budget-constrained3 labels1
Scale-constrained9 labelsNone
Negative6 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative63 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 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.
“Prevalent, ProcessUnity, and OneTrust are excellent choices if you need depth in assessment and compliance” Mistral Small · TPRM · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“The strongest TPRM platforms for 2026 are Mitratech Prevalent, UpGuard, and SecurityScorecard” Claude Haiku 4.5 · TPRM · comparative prompt · first choice
“For a specialist TPRM workflow, start with ProcessUnity and Prevalent.” GPT-6 Luna · TPRM · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best overall for mid-sized companies: Prevalent” GPT-5.4 mini · TPRM · 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.
“They may be more platform than a lean mid-market team needs, so test implementation effort and total cost carefully.” GPT-6 Luna · TPRM · direct prompt · soft negative
“reviews consistently flag limited customization and integration pain for UpGuard and Prevalent” Muse Glimmer 30B · TPRM · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Prevalent, over the 63 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Prevalent was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Prevalent, over the 63 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Prevalent was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 Prevalent. 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 58 of the 63 answers that named Prevalent and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
upguard.com38
mitratech.comYour site33
vanta.com30
bitsight.com28
learn.g2.com23
riskledger.com23
gartner.com19
riskpublishing.com18
g2.com17
coruzant.com16
212 of the 245 domain citations in answers naming Prevalent came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
mitratech.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Prevalent takes 4% of first choices and UpGuard takes 55%.ShowHide
Search and answers
mitratech.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Prevalent takes 4% of first choices and UpGuard takes 55%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “third-party risk management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “third-party risk management platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 74,000 a month (“prevalent”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 4,082 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 46,305 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 11,621 · 614 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 5,254
- Paid Google search
- 14 searches its ads show for, about 177 clicks and $10,768 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
4%
rank 3 of 87 in TPRM
Segment leader
55%
UpGuard
- First choices
- 4 across its categories
- Named in
- 63 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 58 of the answers that named it
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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on mitratech.com
10,050
subdomains included
Content
2,299
counted in the table below
Documentation
43
Product · Integration
300 · 5
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News or press | 951 | 2 | 2026-07-22 | GRC | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 500 | 0 | 2022-09-15 | GRC | |
| Report or ebook | 225 | 0 | 2018-10-22 | GRC | |
| Podcast or video | 167 | 0 | 2020-08-16 | GRC | |
| Blog | 130 | 7 | 2026-09-23 | GRC | |
| Conference or event | 100 | undated | GRC | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 92 | 2 | 2026-08-25 | GRC | |
| Case study | 87 | 0 | 2020-06-25 | GRC | |
| Template or tool | 37 | 0 | 2022-02-24 | ||
| Comparison | 10 | 1 | 2026-07-24 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23Immigration case reporting better visibility with inszoom custom reports blog
- 2026-09-21International ebilling compliance blog
- 2026-09-21Mitratech mineral earns 13 g2 badges fall 2026 blog
- 2026-09-20Why matter management matters to corporate legal departments blog
- 2026-09-18Unified third party control framework grc blog
- 2026-09-17Eu ai act digital omnibus grc blog
Events in person
Last twelve months
- March 11, 2026The Future State of the Legal IndustryNew York, United States · attended
- March 11, 2026Where Legal Leaders RiseAt the Peak, New York, United States · hosted
- March 9, 2026 to March 12, 2026Legalweek 2026Javits Center, New York, United States · exhibited
As the event pages on mitratech.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page mitratech.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Prevalent
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Prevalent; a claim can dispute any of them.
Prevalent (Mitratech) 5Mitratech Prevalent 3Prevalent (by Mitratech) 2Prevalent (now Diligent) 1Prevalent / Mitratech Prevalent 1
Follow Prevalent
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 Prevalent'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 Prevalent, 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 Prevalent by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Prevalent 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 Prevalent, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Prevalent is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Prevalent is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHidePrevalent is among the products AI models recommend first in Third-party risk management this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.