Every category where a model named Veeam 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
Backup and disaster recovery	Cloud and infrastructure	18%	1 of 121	9%	23	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Veeam 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 Veeam 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	0	2	1	3
GPT-5.4 mini	1	1	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	1	0	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	2	1	0	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	0	0	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	2	1	0	0	3
Llama 4 Maverick	1	0	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	2	0	1	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

Direct16 labels10

Paraphrase11 labels5

Comparative12 labels8not counted in share

Budget-constrained6 labels1

Scale-constrained17 labels2

Negative10 labels3not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative72 labels in all, every segment counted; 18 of the 29 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.

“The best backup and disaster recovery solution for a mid-market B2B company is Veeam, Acronis Cyber Protect, or Arcserve UDP.” Llama 4 Maverick · Backup and DR · direct prompt · first choice

“the best backup and disaster recovery solution is usually Veeam if you want the strongest general-purpose platform” Perplexity Sonar · Backup and DR · direct prompt · first choice

“Choose Veeam, Commvault, or Rubrik if you want broad enterprise backup with strong recovery options.” Perplexity Sonar · Backup and DR · comparative prompt · first choice

“| Veeam | Hybrid/VMware | Instant recovery, immutable backups. | Per VM/socket/TB | Yes |” Grok 4.1 Fast · Backup and DR · scale prompt · first choice

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.

“Veeam may be overwhelming for small teams without dedicated IT staff due to extensive configuration options.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Backup and DR · negative prompt · soft negative

“Widely targeted: Used by 82% of Fortune 500 companies, making it a high-value target” Kimi K2 · Backup and DR · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Veeam, over the 72 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Veeam was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Commvault41 of 721Not in the top three

Rubrik39 of 721Not in the top three

Cohesity34 of 721Not in the top three

Druva30 of 723Not in the top three

Acronis20 of 721Not in the top three

Acronis Cyber Protect18 of 728Compare →

Datto17 of 720Not in the top three

Zerto16 of 720Not in the top three

IDrive Business12 of 724Not in the top three

Azure Site Recovery10 of 720Not 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 Veeam. 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 53 of the 72 answers that named Veeam and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

expertinsights.com32

solutionsreview.com31

axcient.com23

ninjaone.com19

veeam.comYour site17

worldmetrics.org16

eon.io15

reddit.com15

controlmonkey.io10

hyperconvergence.com10

171 of the 188 domain citations in answers naming Veeam came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

axcient.com/blog/backup-and-disaster-recovery-solutions20

expertinsights.com/backup-and-recovery/top-disaster-recovery-dr-software-solutions19

expertinsights.com/backup-and-recovery/the-top-business-continuity-and-disaster-recovery-s18

solutionsreview.com/backup-disaster-recovery/whats-changed-2024-gartner-magic-quadrant-for16

solutionsreview.com/backup-disaster-recovery/the-best-backup-and-disaster-recovery-compani13

eon.io/blog/enterprise-backup-solutions10

hyperconvergence.com/best-backup-and-disaster-recovery-solutions-for-smbs10

solutionsreview.com/backup-disaster-recovery/the-best-disaster-recovery-as-a-service-compa10

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 Veeam'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 Veeam, 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 veeam.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.