Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 34 → 44 of 46
Trellix · 1 category · RankedTrellix EDR
17Judge labels
0First choices
6Negative labels
11 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in EDR for enterprise buyers
Rank 15 of 55 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 4 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business46 of 49
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market15 of 55
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise29 of 47
0%11 labels
criticized challenger
In edr · 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 Trellix EDR 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 15 of 55 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint at 30% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Trellix EDR held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · EDR · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 28 → 13 of 52
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 40 → 31 of 43
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDR | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 28 → 15 of 55 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Trellix EDR across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Trellix EDR across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 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
Comparative11 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative5 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative17 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.
“Trellix combines McAfee endpoint protection with FireEye XDR, offering one-click rollback and ePO management.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · EDR · 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 Trellix EDR, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Trellix EDR was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Trellix EDR, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Trellix EDR was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Trellix EDR. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 17 of the 17 answers that named Trellix EDR and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
kaseya.com9
docs.broadcom.com8
sentinelone.com8
techrepublic.com8
huntress.com6
paloaltonetworks.com6
senseon.io6
cioinfluence.com5
crowdstrike.com5
cybersecuritynews.com5
Sixty-six of the sixty-six domain citations in answers naming Trellix EDR came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
trellix.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Trellix EDR takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint takes 30%.ShowHide
Search and answers
trellix.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Trellix EDR takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint takes 30%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “edr platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “edr platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 170 a month (“trellix edr”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 5 a month
- Its company's site
- trellix.com shared with Trellix's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 71,321 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 7,391 · 524 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 11,022
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 15 of 55 in EDR
Segment leader
30%
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 17 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 17 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as Trellix EDR
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Trellix EDR; a claim can dispute any of them.
Trellix 3Trellix (formerly McAfee/FireEye) 1
Follow Trellix EDR
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Trellix is the company behind Trellix EDR.ShowHide
The company
Trellix is the company behind Trellix EDR.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIs 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 Trellix EDR'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 Trellix EDR, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Trellix EDR by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Trellix EDR is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Trellix EDR, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.