IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › SecPod SanerNow · September 2026 Edition

SecPod · 3 categories · Named, not ranked

SecPod SanerNow

11Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

3Categories

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

Standing

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SecPod SanerNow was named 6 times in Vuln management and 2 other categories, where Rapid7 InsightVM led with 45%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business47 of 78

under the label threshold

Mid-market62 of 80

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In vuln management · 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 SecPod SanerNow 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
Vulnerability management platforms	Security operations	0%	62 of 80	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Rapid7 InsightVM at 45%
Attack surface management	Security operations	0%	30 of 104	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Intruder at 59%
Patch management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	62 of 87	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Action1 at 27%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	2	0	2
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	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative3 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.

“Native risk remediation engine with automatic patch deployment” MiniMax M2.5 · ASM · comparative prompt · alternative

“SecPod SanerNow = broad discovery + patch automation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · ASM · 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.

“none of them offer patchless protection” Perplexity Sonar · Vuln management · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Synack5 of 112Not in the top three

Wiz5 of 110Not in the top three

Bitsight4 of 111Not in the top three

Cortex Xpanse4 of 111Not in the top three

Automox4 of 110Not in the top three

Censys ASM4 of 110Not in the top three

CyCognito3 of 111Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management3 of 110Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management3 of 110Not in the top three

Orca Security3 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 SecPod SanerNow. 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 9 of the 11 answers that named SecPod SanerNow and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

secpod.comYour site6

upguard.com6

synack.com5

bitsight.com4

devopsschool.com4

gartner.com4

paloaltonetworks.com3

wiz.io3

breachsense.com2

comparitech.com2

Thirty-three of the thirty-nine domain citations in answers naming SecPod SanerNow came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

secpod.com/learn/expressions-and-povs/top-attack-surface-management-vendors-20245

synack.com/blog/best-attack-surface-management-tools5

upguard.com/blog/best-attack-surface-management-software-solutions5

bitsight.com/guides/best-external-attack-surface-management-platforms-for-global-enterpris4

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-attack-surface-management-asm-features-pros-cons-comparison3

gartner.com/reviews/market/external-attack-surface-management3

secpod.com/blog/top-attack-surface-management-vendors-20243

wiz.io/academy/cloud-security/attack-surface-management-tools3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as SecPod SanerNow

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

SecPod 1SecPod Saner 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 SecPod SanerNow'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 SecPod SanerNow, 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 secpod.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.