Small business▼−7Since September 2026: 17% → 10%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
10%from 17% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 3 → 4 of 71
15 categories · RankedWazuh
135Judge labels
23First choices
22Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
15Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
21% in SIEM for mid-market buyers
Rank 2 of 61 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 24% of its 21 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Wazuh →By buyer segmentStrongest at mid-market.
Small business4 of 79
10%45 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market2 of 61
21%21 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise49 of 61
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
In siem · 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 Wazuh 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIEM platforms | Security operations | 21% | 2 of 61 | 24% | 21 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 18% → 20%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Deception technology | Security operations | 2% | 20 of 94 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Thinkst Canary at 37% | |
| AI SOC agents | Security operations | 2% | 15 of 104 | 11% | 9 | under 10 labels · led by Dropzone AI at 24% | |
| AI security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 80 of 233 | 25% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11% | |
| Extended detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 19 of 58 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender XDR at 40% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Log management | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 22 of 73 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Datadog Log Management at 28% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Client-side protection | Security operations | 0% | 110 of 120 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by cside at 13% | |
| Endpoint detection and response | Security operations | 0% | 36 of 55 | 50% | 2 | 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. |
| Insider risk management | Security operations | 0% | 35 of 84 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management at 22% | |
| OT and IoT security | Security operations | 0% | 29 of 107 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for IoT at 21% | |
| SOAR platforms | Security operations | 0% | 25 of 67 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Tines at 41% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Data loss prevention | Security operations | 0% | 70 of 89 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Purview DLP at 46% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Endpoint protection | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 43 of 86 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint at 22% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Identity threat detection and response | Identity and access | 0% | 76 of 105 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Huntress Managed ITDR at 51% | |
| Vulnerability management platforms | Security operations | 0% | 43 of 77 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Rapid7 InsightVM at 30% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Wazuh held within the floor in all fifteen categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · SIEM · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 18% → 20%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
20%from 18% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 3 → 2 of 55
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 27 → 40 of 51
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deception | 0% | 3% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 3% now. | New this edition | Rank 20 of 94, unchanged |
| Vuln management | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 8 → 43 of 77 |
| SOAR | 2% | 0% | ▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 13 → 25 of 67 |
| SIEM | 18% | 20% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 18% → 20%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 3 → 2 of 61 |
| AI SOC agents | 0% | 2% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. | New this edition | Rank 15 of 104, unchanged |
| AI security | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 80 of 233, unchanged |
| 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 21 → 19 of 58 |
| Logs | 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 44 → 22 of 73 |
| Client-side protection | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 110 of 120, unchanged |
| 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 29 → 36 of 55 |
| Insider risk | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 35 of 84, unchanged |
| OT/IoT security | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 29 of 107, unchanged |
| DLP | 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 40 → 70 of 89 |
| Endpoint protection | 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 73 → 43 of 86 |
| ITDR | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 76 of 105, 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 Wazuh 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 Wazuh 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 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 9 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
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
Direct13 labelsNone
Paraphrase10 labelsNone
Comparative16 labelsNone
Budget-constrained69 labels23
Scale-constrained6 labelsNone
Negative21 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative135 labels in all, every segment counted; 23 of the 23 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 budget-friendly platform-style option: Wazuh + honeypots/decoys if you have some technical staff and want low software cost.” GPT-5.4 mini · Deception · budget prompt · first choice
“If you have in-house engineering capacity and <50 GB/day ingest, Wazuh / Security Onion self-hosted is the lowest cash outlay.” Muse Glimmer 30B · SIEM · budget prompt · first choice
“Wazuh is the most complete open-source SIEM available, combining SIEM and XDR capabilities with lightweight agents” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SIEM · budget prompt · first choice
“the best starting point for an AI SOC (Security Operations Center) agent is an open-source solution like Wazuh” Grok 4.20 · AI SOC agents · budget 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.
“Open-source self-build solutions (such as Wazuh or Graylog with custom rules) are generally not recommended unless you have at least two dedicated SIEM engineers” Mistral Small · SIEM · negative prompt · soft negative
“others advise skipping them depending on your needs, particularly for enterprise environments where robust support is critical” MiniMax M2.5 · SIEM · negative prompt · soft negative
“Platforms like Elastic, Wazuh, and Security Onion are incredibly capable but demand significant engineering hours.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SIEM · negative prompt · soft negative
“Choose Wazuh only if you have experienced security/IT staff who can self-host and manage an open-source stack” DeepSeek V4 Flash · AI SOC agents · budget prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Wazuh, over the 135 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Wazuh was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Wazuh, over the 135 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Wazuh 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 Wazuh. 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 124 of the 135 answers that named Wazuh and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
underdefense.com59
q-sec.com42
sentinelone.com40
us.fitgap.com38
g2.com30
paloaltonetworks.com30
reddit.com25
techrepublic.com24
huntress.com23
logmanager.com23
334 of the 334 domain citations in answers naming Wazuh came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
wazuh.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Wazuh takes 21% of first choices and Microsoft Sentinel takes 38%.ShowHide
Search and answers
wazuh.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Wazuh takes 21% of first choices and Microsoft Sentinel takes 38%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “siem platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “siem platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 9,900 a month (“wazuh”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 446 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 7,214 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 687 · 161 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 3,670
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
21%
rank 2 of 61 in SIEM
Segment leader
38%
Microsoft Sentinel
- First choices
- 23 across its categories
- Named in
- 135 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 124 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on wazuh.com
704
subdomains included
Content
446
counted in the table below
Documentation
47
Product · Integration
3 · 2
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 404 | 17 | 2026-09-28 | XDR, CSPM | |
| Glossary or explainer | 19 | undated | XDR, SIEM | ||
| Case study | 15 | 1 | 2026-09-15 | ||
| Conference or event | 4 | undated | |||
| News or press | 3 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-28Wazuh and ai cyber consulting announce partnership to strengthen soc services blog
- 2026-09-24Detecting common windows privilege escalation techniques with wazuh blog
- 2026-09-17Securing web applications with coraza waf and wazuh blog
- 2026-09-15Isecng delivers flexible open source security services with wazuh case study
- 2026-09-10Detecting windows attacks with microsoft defender asr and wazuh blog
- 2026-09-04Wazuh and e defence announce partnership to improve soc services blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page wazuh.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Wazuh
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Wazuh; a claim can dispute any of them.
Wazuh (open-source) 1
Follow Wazuh
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
Wazuh is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Wazuh is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The Open Source Security Platform; Unified XDR and SIEM protection for endpoints and cloud workloads.
- For
- security analysts and enterprise users
- Price stated
- Free and open source; no license cost; Free Cloud Trial wazuh.com
- Starting price
- 0 wazuh.com
- Free plan or trial
- Free Cloud Trial wazuh.com
- Customers named
- GuayoyoEnevoITAUniversity of ChichesterGrouponWoopAlignetFirmGuardian
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, certifications, hosting
What Wazuh's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: wazuh.com, wazuh.com/platform/xdr, wazuh.com/resources/case-studies, wazuh.com/partners. A claimed page can correct any of 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 Wazuh'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 Wazuh, 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 Wazuh by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Wazuh 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 Wazuh, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Wazuh is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Wazuh is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideWazuh is among the products AI models recommend first in SIEM platforms this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.