Every category where a model named SUSE NeuVector 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
Container and Kubernetes security	Cloud and infrastructure	2%	8 of 78	4%	24	accepted challenger

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	2	0	4
Mistral Small	0	2	1	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	2	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	2	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	2	1	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	2	0	3

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

Direct8 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative10 labelsNone

Budget-constrained19 labels3

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative14 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative54 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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.

“Option 1: The Best All-in-One Free Platform ... It is the only fully-featured, commercial-grade container security platform you can run entirely for free” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Container security · budget prompt · first choice

“Full-lifecycle (vuln mgmt, network segmentation, L7 firewall, IDS/IPS, compliance). Deploys in K8s; more integrated if you want a "platform" feel.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Container security · budget prompt · alternative

“SUSE NeuVector is the strongest budget-conscious platform mentioned in the results because it is also fully open-sourced” Perplexity Sonar · Container security · budget prompt · alternative

“Best fit: Teams that need enterprise-grade enforcement but want to avoid commercial licensing entirely.” Kimi K2 · Container 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.

“SUSE acquiring NeuVector... these consolidated ... platforms ... present specific challenges” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Container security · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SUSE NeuVector, over the 54 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SUSE NeuVector was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Trivy43 of 5417Not in the top three

Falco42 of 5410Not in the top three

Aqua Security40 of 5414Not in the top three

Prisma Cloud39 of 542Not in the top three

Snyk28 of 542Not in the top three

Kubescape26 of 546Not in the top three

Wiz26 of 543Not in the top three

Sysdig Secure23 of 546Not in the top three

Sysdig20 of 544Not in the top three

Snyk Container14 of 541Not 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 SUSE NeuVector. 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 47 of the 54 answers that named SUSE NeuVector and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

gbhackers.com46

cyberpress.org41

cybersecuritynews.com34

decryptiondigest.com26

ox.security22

expertinsights.com19

checkmarx.com18

softwareadvice.com16

g2.com13

getapp.com13

248 of the 248 domain citations in answers naming SUSE NeuVector came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gbhackers.com/best-container-security-compared46

cyberpress.org/container-security-by-business-size-241

cybersecuritynews.com/best-container-security-tools25

decryptiondigest.com/blog/guide-finding-best-container-security-tools24

expertinsights.com/application-security/the-top-container-security-tools19

cybersecuritynews.com/best-container-security-tools/amp16

softwareadvice.com/container-security16

ox.security/blog/container-security-solutions-in-202612

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as SUSE NeuVector

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

NeuVector 8NeuVector (SUSE, open-source) 1NeuVector (acquired by SUSE) 1SUSE NeuVector Community Edition 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 SUSE NeuVector'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 SUSE NeuVector, 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 suse.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.