Every category where a model named Sublime Security 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
Email security	Security operations	2%	9 of 71	0%	9	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Office 365 at 31%

Movement

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

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	1	3	0	4
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative10 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained3 labels2

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative4 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative25 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 4 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.

“Best Overall Value for Small Teams: Sublime Security ... Go with Sublime Security (it's free and highly capable)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Email security · budget prompt · first choice

“These are specifically designed to solve the false-positive and BEC detection failures of older vendors.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Email security · negative prompt · first choice

“A modern, highly flexible platform using "detection-as-code," allowing your team to write custom rules if you have a hands-on IT/security engineer.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Email security · scale prompt · alternative

“organizations prioritizing control and detection iteration may prefer Sublime Security (API-first approach)” MiniMax M2.5 · Email security · 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 Sublime Security, over the 25 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sublime Security was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Proofpoint Email Protection22 of 254Not in the top three

Microsoft Defender for Office 36521 of 252Not in the top three

Abnormal AI20 of 254Not in the top three

Mimecast Email Security19 of 250Not in the top three

Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration15 of 253Not in the top three

IRONSCALES14 of 251Not in the top three

Barracuda Email Protection10 of 250Not in the top three

Cisco Secure Email8 of 250Not in the top three

Google Workspace5 of 250Not in the top three

Sophos Email3 of 250Not 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 Sublime Security. 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 14 of the 25 answers that named Sublime Security and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gartner.com14

sublime.securityYour site11

proofpoint.com6

cybervendorguide.com5

flamingo.run5

adaptivesecurity.com4

abnormal.ai3

bcs365.com3

costbench.com3

g2.com3

Forty-six of the fifty-seven domain citations in answers naming Sublime Security came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/email-security14

sublime.security/articles/enterprise-email-security-solutions10

cybervendorguide.com/guides/email-security5

flamingo.run/blog/email-security-solutions5

sublime.security/articles/top-email-security-companies4

bcs365.com/insights/best-email-security-solutions-gartner3

costbench.com/best/best-email-security-for-enterprise3

kaseya.com/blog/best-email-security-solutions3

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 Sublime Security'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 Sublime Security, 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 sublime.security 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.