| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dynamic application security testing | Developer platform | 0% | 19 of 58 | 14% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by OWASP ZAP at 29% |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Qualys WAS and Tenable.io are best for enterprises that need unified vulnerability and compliance management.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · DAST · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for: Organizations already using Qualys for vulnerability management/compliance” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DAST · comparative prompt · alternative
“For Enterprise-Wide Deployment & Compliance: Acunetix or Qualys WAS.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · DAST · comparative prompt · alternative
“If Compliance is Critical: Qualys Web Application Scanning (WAS)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · DAST · paraphrase 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.
“Do not rely on it as your primary developer-facing security tool for finding real exploitation paths.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · DAST · 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 19 of the 21 answers that named Qualys Web Application Scanning and are not a share of its labels.
104 of the 104 domain citations in answers naming Qualys Web Application Scanning 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 Qualys Web Application Scanning's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: qualys.com/faqs-resources-web-application-scanning, qualys.com/apps/web-app-scanning, qualys.com/apps/web-app-firewall, qualys.com/apps/web-app-scanning/story/web-application-security-analyst-peter, docs.qualys.com/en/was/latest/web_applications/web_apps.htm. 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 Qualys Web Application Scanning'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 Qualys Web Application Scanning, 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 Qualys Web Application Scanning by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: