Small business▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 69 → 12 of 114
Rapid7 · 2 categories · RankedRapid7 Threat Command
40Judge labels
5First choices
3Negative labels
9 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in DRP for mid-market buyers
Rank 9 of 119 in the mid-market standing
3 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 7 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Rapid7 Threat Command →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business13 of 126
2%5 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market9 of 119
5%7 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise26 of 83
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
In threat intel · 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 Rapid7 Threat Command 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intelligence platforms | Security operations | 5% | 9 of 119 | 0% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by MISP at 12% | ▼−5Since September 2026: 11% → 6%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Digital risk protection | Security operations | 2% | 11 of 86 | 0% | 12 | accepted challenger |
Movement
Since September 2026, Rapid7 Threat Command held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Threat intel · by segment
Mid-market▼−5Since September 2026: 11% → 6%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
6%from 11% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 3 → 9 of 111
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 26 of 78, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Threat intel | 11% | 6% | ▼−5Since September 2026: 11% → 6%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 9 of 119 |
| DRP | 0% | 2% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. | New this edition | Rank 11 of 86, 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 Rapid7 Threat Command 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 Rapid7 Threat Command 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 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct12 labels4
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative13 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained7 labels1
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative40 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 5 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.
“Rapid7 Threat Command emerges as the leading choice for most mid-market B2B companies” MiniMax M2.5 · Threat intel · direct prompt · first choice
“Rapid7 Threat Command and Cyble Vision are the strongest overall picks” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Threat intel · direct prompt · first choice
“the strongest default choice is Rapid7 Threat Command or UpGuard” Perplexity Sonar · DRP · direct prompt · first choice
“Rapid7 Threat Command and Cyble Vision are the top choices” Mistral Small · Threat intel · direct 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Rapid7 Threat Command, over the 40 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Rapid7 Threat Command was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Rapid7 Threat Command, over the 40 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Rapid7 Threat Command 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 Rapid7 Threat Command. 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 40 of the 40 answers that named Rapid7 Threat Command and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
upguard.com33
expertinsights.com24
g2.com19
guideflow.com17
cloudsek.com15
breachsense.com14
peerspot.com13
cyberpress.org12
netcraft.com11
cyble.com10
168 of the 168 domain citations in answers naming Rapid7 Threat Command came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Rapid7 Threat Command stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Rapid7 Threat Command stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 50 a month (“rapid7 threat command”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 1 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on Rapid7's site (rapid7.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
5%
rank 9 of 119 in threat intel
Segment leader
12%
MISP
- First choices
- 5 across its categories
- Named in
- 40 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 40 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.
Names read as Rapid7 Threat Command
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Rapid7 Threat Command; a claim can dispute any of them.
Rapid7 Threat Command (Formerly IntSights) 1Rapid7 Threat Command / Digital Risk Protection 1
Follow Rapid7 Threat Command
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.
The company
Rapid7 is the company behind Rapid7 Threat Command.ShowHide
The company
Rapid7 is the company behind Rapid7 Threat Command.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Rapid7
- Rapid7 ASM, Rapid7 AppSec Platform, Rapid7 Exposure Command, Rapid7 Incident Command, Rapid7 InsightAppSec, Rapid7 InsightCloudSec, Rapid7 InsightConnect, Rapid7 InsightIDR and 8 more
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- delivers proactive defense by transforming threat intelligence into automated security action
- For
- your organization, employees, executives, and board members
- Customers named
- DAMAC Properties
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Rapid7 Threat Command's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: docs.rapid7.com/threat-command, rapid7.com/products/threat-command, docs.rapid7.com/threat-command/intellifind, docs.rapid7.com/threat-command/introduction, docs.rapid7.com/threat-command/configurations. A claimed page can correct any of 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 Rapid7 Threat Command'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 Rapid7 Threat Command, 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 Rapid7 Threat Command by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Rapid7 Threat Command 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 Rapid7 Threat Command, 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.