Index › Products › Resilience · October 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

Resilience

18Judge labels

2First choices

4Negative labels

6 / 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.

Standing

7 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Resilience was named 7 times in Cyber risk quant and 2 other categories, where CyberSaint CyberStrong led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business34 of 145

under the label threshold

Mid-market13 of 116

under the label threshold

Enterprise20 of 74

under the label threshold

In cyber risk quant · 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 Resilience 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
Cyber risk quantification	Security operations	2%	13 of 116	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by CyberSaint CyberStrong at 25%
Business continuity management	Security operations	0%	80 of 114	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by LogicManager at 24%
Digital risk protection	Security operations	0%	80 of 86	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by UpGuard BreachSight at 22%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Resilience yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Resilience 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	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	2	3
Mistral Small	1	1	1	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	1	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	0	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labels2

Comparative4 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative18 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.

“Resilience and Kovrr are both strong choices, with Resilience being particularly good for vulnerability prioritization” Mistral Small · Cyber risk quant · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Balbix and Resilience excel in automation and real-time risk assessment” Mistral Small · Cyber risk quant · comparative prompt · alternative

“Mid-large firms focusing on vuln management with financial lens.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Cyber risk quant · comparative 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 Resilience, over the 18 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Resilience was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Kovrr14 of 182Not among the top eight

Balbix10 of 180Not among the top eight

SAFE Security9 of 186Not among the top eight

Axio8 of 181Not among the top eight

CyberSaint CyberStrong5 of 181Not among the top eight

RiskLens4 of 180Not among the top eight

vCISO Lite3 of 180Not among the top eight

FairCRQ2 of 182Not among the top eight

Bitsight2 of 180Not among the top eight

Open FAIR2 of 180Not among the top eight

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 Resilience. 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 16 of the 18 answers that named Resilience and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com16

kovrr.com11

riskpublishing.com11

worldmetrics.org8

f6s.com7

bitsight.com6

securityboulevard.com6

trycomp.ai6

vcisolite.com6

cybersaint.io5

No domain is on file for Resilience, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

g2.com/categories/cyber-risk-quantification-crq-tools16

riskpublishing.com/best-cyber-risk-quantification-platforms-compar10

kovrr.com/blog-post/the-best-cyber-risk-quantification-tools-in-2026-a-buyers-guide8

worldmetrics.org/best/cyber-risk-quantification-software7

bitsight.com/guides/best-cyber-risk-management-platforms-for-enterprises6

f6s.com/software/category/cyber-risk-quantification6

riskpublishing.com/best-risk-quantification-software-compared-fair6

trycomp.ai/hub/top-risk-management-software6

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Resilience stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 368,000 a month (“resilience”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 22,194 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 13 of 116 in cyber risk quant

Segment leader

25%

CyberSaint CyberStrong

First choices: 2 across its categories
Named in: 18 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

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.

Follow Resilience

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 Resilience'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 Resilience, 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 Resilience by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Resilience 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 Resilience, 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.