| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Insider risk management | Security operations | 4% | 6 of 84 | 19% | 27 | accepted challenger |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Balanced mid-market pick: Proofpoint or Code42 Incydr for proven detection without overkill” Grok 4.1 Fast · Insider risk · direct prompt · first choice
“my default recommendation would be Proofpoint Insider Threat Management” GPT-5.4 mini · Insider risk · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“A solution to detect and respond to insider risks by providing visibility into user behavior across endpoints, email, and cloud applications” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Insider risk · direct prompt · alternative
“is a solid enterprise alternative, but pricing is typically quote-based and often less budget-friendly upfront” GPT-5.4 mini · Insider risk · budget 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.
“Potential concerns: Ecosystem dependency (Proofpoint suite), may be less suited for non-Proofpoint environments; session recording can raise privacy concerns.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Insider risk · negative prompt · soft negative
“Invasive monitoring (e.g., keystroke logging, screen recording in DTEX or Proofpoint ObserveIT) raises legal/ethical concerns” Grok 4.1 Fast · Insider risk · negative prompt · soft negative
“screen recording in DTEX or Proofpoint ObserveIT) raises legal/ethical concerns under GDPR, HIPAA” Grok 4.1 Fast · Insider risk · negative prompt · soft negative
“~$75K+ starting | Strong session recording... | Higher cost, longer deployment” Kimi K2 · Insider risk · scale 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 61 of the 64 answers that named Proofpoint Insider Threat Management and are not a share of its labels.
249 of the 275 domain citations in answers naming Proofpoint Insider Threat Management came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
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 Proofpoint Insider Threat Management's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: proofpoint.com/br/products/insider-threat-management, proofpoint.com/br/solutions/combat-data-loss-and-insider-risk, proofpoint.com/it/products/premium-security-services/insider-threat-management-services, proofpoint.com/jp/resources/solution-briefs/endpoint-data-loss-prevention-and-insider-threat-management. 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 Proofpoint Insider Threat Management'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 Proofpoint Insider Threat Management, 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 Proofpoint Insider Threat Management by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: