IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › RiskRecon · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

RiskRecon

11Judge labels

0First choices

5Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. RiskRecon was named 3 times in TPRM and 1 other category, where UpGuard led with 53%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business58 of 71

under the label threshold

Mid-market68 of 72

under the label threshold

Enterprise46 of 59

under the label threshold

In tprm · 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 RiskRecon 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
Third-party risk management	Security operations	0%	68 of 72	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by UpGuard at 53%
Attack surface management	Security operations	0%	82 of 104	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Intruder at 59%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“RiskRecon (acquired by Mastercard in 2020) serves as a case study here. While not necessarily problematic, acquisitions often lead to: Reduced specialist support teams” Kimi K2 · TPRM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as RiskRecon, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and RiskRecon was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Bitsight10 of 110Not in the top three

OneTrust Third-Party Risk Management9 of 113Not in the top three

SecurityScorecard9 of 110Not in the top three

Prevalent8 of 110Not in the top three

ProcessUnity7 of 112Not in the top three

UpGuard7 of 110Not in the top three

Panorays6 of 110Not in the top three

Venminder5 of 110Not in the top three

Archer3 of 110Not in the top three

Vanta3 of 110Not 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 RiskRecon. 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 8 of the 11 answers that named RiskRecon and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

upguard.com8

bitsight.com6

gartner.com5

vanta.com4

mitratech.com3

processunity.com3

sprinto.com3

atlassystems.com2

bestdevops.com2

bigideasdb.com2

Thirty-eight of the thirty-eight domain citations in answers naming RiskRecon came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

upguard.com/blog/best-third-party-risk-management-software-solutions6

bitsight.com/guides/best-third-party-risk-management-platforms-for-enterprises5

vanta.com/resources/best-tprm-software-for-enterprises4

gartner.com/reviews/market/it-vendor-risk-management-solutions3

gartner.com/reviews/market/third-party-risk-management-technology-solutions3

processunity.com/resources/blogs/10-critical-third-party-risk-management-challenges-and-ho3

bestdevops.com/top-10-third-party-risk-management-tools-features-pros-cons-comparison2

bigideasdb.com/software/third-party-supplier-risk-management2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as RiskRecon

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as RiskRecon; a claim can dispute any of them.

RiskRecon (UpGuard) 1

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 RiskRecon'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 RiskRecon, 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 riskrecon.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.