IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Sophos Mobile · September 2026 Edition

Sophos · 1 category · Named, not ranked

Sophos Mobile

7Judge labels

0First choices

4Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

1Category

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

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Sophos Mobile was named 1 time in UEM, where Microsoft Intune led with 43%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business50 of 59

under the label threshold

Mid-market47 of 52

under the label threshold

Enterprise36 of 57

under the label threshold

In uem · 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 Sophos Mobile 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
Unified endpoint management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	47 of 52	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Intune at 43%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 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.

“it scores lower in overall evaluations (7.0/10) and may not be the best fit” Mistral Small · UEM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Sophos Mobile, over the 7 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sophos Mobile was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Microsoft Intune5 of 75Not in the top three

Baramundi5 of 70Not in the top three

Ivanti5 of 70Not in the top three

Jamf5 of 70Not in the top three

Matrix425 of 70Not in the top three

Omnissa Workspace ONE4 of 71Not in the top three

Citrix4 of 70Not in the top three

IBM MaaS3603 of 70Not in the top three

ManageEngine3 of 70Not in the top three

42Gears SureMDM2 of 70Not 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 Sophos Mobile. 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 7 of the 7 answers that named Sophos Mobile and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cyberpress.org6

gbhackers.com5

ciopages.com3

leonidastek.com3

cdn-dynmedia-1.microsoft.com2

cybersecuritynews.com2

g2.com2

nhimg.org2

action1.com1

blog.scalefusion.com1

Twenty-seven of the twenty-seven domain citations in answers naming Sophos Mobile came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cyberpress.org/uem-solutions-by-business-size6

gbhackers.com/best-uem-solutions-compared5

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/endpoint-management-uem3

leonidastek.com/blog/unified-endpoint-management3

cdn-dynmedia-1.microsoft.com/is/content/microsoftcorp/microsoft/final/en-us/microsoft-bran2

cybersecuritynews.com/best-uem-solutions/amp2

g2.com/categories/unified-endpoint-management-uem/small-business2

nhimg.org/faq/what-should-organisations-look-for-in-a-unified-endpoint-management-platform2

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Sophos Mobile'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 Sophos Mobile, 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 sophos.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.