Every category where a model named Trellix XDR 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
Extended detection and response	Security operations	0%	52 of 58	27%	11	criticized challenger	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
Data loss prevention	Security operations	0%	85 of 89	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview DLP at 46%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.

Movement

Since September 2026, Trellix XDR held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.

Best category · XDR · by segment

Small businessgoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.

0%from 0% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 11 pointsNot ranked

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 22 → 48 of 53

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 33 → 36 of 46

All categories · Mid-market

Category	September 2026	Now	Change	Reading	Rank
XDR	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 22 → 52 of 58
DLP	0%	0%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.	New this edition	Rank 85 of 89, unchanged

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 XDR across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.20	1	1	2
Mistral Small	2	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	2	4
Kimi K2	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative9 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative8 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative23 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.

“Trellix has faced challenges in unifying two vastly different, legacy portfolios. Security teams frequently report complex administration” Gemini 3.5 Flash · XDR · negative prompt · hard negative

“Users often cite high complexity in the console... customers frequently face a steep learning curve, inconsistent UI flows” Qwen 3.7 Flash · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative

“cheaper and easier to implement than legacy enterprise giants like McAfee/Trellix” Qwen 3.7 Flash · DLP · direct prompt · soft negative

“Noise overload; complex workflows for smaller teams.” Grok 4.20 · XDR · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Trellix XDR, over the 23 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Trellix XDR was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CrowdStrike Falcon Insight XDR20 of 2310Not among the top eight

Microsoft Defender XDR20 of 239Not among the top eight

SentinelOne Singularity20 of 231Not among the top eight

Cisco XDR18 of 230Not among the top eight

Trend Vision One16 of 230Not among the top eight

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR14 of 236Not among the top eight

Bitdefender GravityZone XDR11 of 230Not among the top eight

Fortinet FortiXDR10 of 230Not among the top eight

Sophos9 of 230Not among the top eight

Sophos Intercept X8 of 231Not among the top eight

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 XDR. 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 21 of the 23 answers that named Trellix XDR and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

forrester.com13

paloaltonetworks.com13

aimultiple.com12

expertinsights.com12

coruzant.com10

sdxcentral.com10

crowdstrike.com9

gartner.com9

sentinelone.com8

channelfutures.com7

103 of the 103 domain citations in answers naming Trellix XDR came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

expertinsights.com/endpoint-security/the-top-xdr-solutions12

aimultiple.com/xdr-solutions11

coruzant.com/security/best-xdr-tools10

forrester.com/blogs/announcing-the-forrester-wave-extended-detection-and-response-platform10

sdxcentral.com/analysis/microsoft-palo-alto-networks-crowdstrike-top-forrester-xdr-wave10

paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/xdr-solutions9

channelfutures.com/security/cf20-2024-s-20-top-xdr-providers-you-should-know7

decryptiondigest.com/blog/best-xdr-platforms-20267

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 XDR takes 0% of first choices and Microsoft Defender XDR takes 40%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “xdr platform”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “xdr platforms”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 30 a month (“trellix xdr”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 3 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 edition

Share of first choices

rank 52 of 58 in XDR

Segment leader

40%

Microsoft Defender XDR

First choices: 0 across its categories
Named in: 23 answers
Its own site cited: in 21 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 XDR

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

Trellix 6McAfee/Trellix 1Trellix (formerly McAfee + FireEye) 1

Follow Trellix XDR

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 XDR.

ShowHide

On record

Company records

Also from Trellix: Trellix (McAfee) DLP, Trellix (McAfee) Endpoint Security, Trellix DLP, Trellix Data Loss Prevention, Trellix EDR, Trellix Endpoint Security Suite, Trellix NDR, Trellix XDR for SMBs

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 Trellix XDR'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 XDR, 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 XDR by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Trellix XDR 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 XDR, 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.