IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › PulseOn · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

PulseOn

1Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

1 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

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. PulseOn was named 1 time in RMM, where NinjaOne led with 50%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market28 of 57

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In rmm · 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 PulseOn 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
Remote monitoring and management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	28 of 57	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by NinjaOne at 50%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for PulseOn 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 PulseOn across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative1 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.

“An emerging open-source/freemium option gaining traction for smaller teams.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · RMM · negative prompt · alternative

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 PulseOn, over the 1 answer that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and PulseOn was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Atera1 of 11Not in the top three

BeyondTrust1 of 10Not in the top three

ConnectWise RMM1 of 10Not in the top three

Datto RMM1 of 10Not in the top three

Kaseya1 of 10Not in the top three

NinjaOne1 of 10Not in the top three

SimpleHelp1 of 10Not in the top three

Syncro1 of 10Not 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 PulseOn. 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 1 of the 1 answers that named PulseOn and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

acronis.com1

aimultiple.com1

atera.com1

nz.trustpilot.com1

reddit.com1

techcommunity.microsoft.com1

trustradius.com1

tyqra.app1

Eight of the eight domain citations in answers naming PulseOn came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

acronis.com/en/tru/posts/the-remote-access-blind-spot-an-analysis-of-rmm-tool-risk-for-smb1

aimultiple.com/rmm-software1

atera.com/blog/datto-alternatives1

nz.trustpilot.com/review/datto.com1

reddit.com/r/msp/comments/1conbkq/choosing_the_ideal_rmm_this_20241

reddit.com/r/msp/comments/qddxk7/moving_away_from_datto_rmm1

reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1rimsc1/what_are_the_options_for_the_best_rmm_for_a_small1

techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/microsoft-defender-experts/keys-to-the-kingdom-rmm-exploi1

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 PulseOn'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 PulseOn, 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 pulseon.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.