Breach and attack simulation
Asked as “breach and attack simulation platform”, and as “security control validation tool”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B company. 55 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, fourteen models each. Added to the November 2026 Edition.
Standing · first-choice share
35%
Contested · AttackIQ Flex 13%
35Cymulate13AttackIQ Flex13Picus Security Validation Platform40others
35% of first choices, contested.
Since October 2026▲+11Since October 2026: 24% → 35%, +11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Cymulate held the lead, +11 points on 24%, inside the 11-point floor.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment; they sit side by side and are never added together.
Small business
Vanta20%Contested▲+7Since October 2026: 13% → 20%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →Mid-market
Cymulate35%Contested▲+11Since October 2026: 24% → 35%, +11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.This pageEnterpriseCymulate27%Contested▲+3Since October 2026: 24% → 27%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →
Vanta20%Contested▲+7Since October 2026: 13% → 20%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →Mid-marketCymulate35%Contested▲+11Since October 2026: 24% → 35%, +11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.This pageEnterpriseCymulate27%Contested▲+3Since October 2026: 24% → 27%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince October 2026
01Cymulate35%24%62endorsed leader▲+11Since October 2026: 24% → 35%, +11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.24% → 35%
Cymulate35%24%62endorsed leader▲+11Since October 2026: 24% → 35%, +11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.24% → 35%02
Picus Security Validation Platform13%19%63accepted challenger▼−4Since October 2026: 17% → 13%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.17% → 13%
Picus Security Validation Platform13%19%63accepted challenger▼−4Since October 2026: 17% → 13%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.17% → 13%03
AttackIQ Flex13%10%10accepted challenger▲+6Since October 2026: 7% → 13%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.7% → 13%
AttackIQ Flex13%10%10accepted challenger▲+6Since October 2026: 7% → 13%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.7% → 13%04MITRE Caldera9%9%11accepted challenger▲+6Since October 2026: 3% → 9%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.3% → 9%
05
Atomic Red Team7%9%11accepted challenger▲+7Since October 2026: 0% → 7%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 7%
Atomic Red Team7%9%11accepted challenger▲+7Since October 2026: 0% → 7%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 7%06
AttackIQ4%19%47accepted challenger▲+2Since October 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 4%
AttackIQ4%19%47accepted challenger▲+2Since October 2026: 2% → 4%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 4%07
Pentera4%33%39criticized challenger▼−3Since October 2026: 7% → 4%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.7% → 4%
Pentera4%33%39criticized challenger▼−3Since October 2026: 7% → 4%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.7% → 4%08Infection Monkey2%9%11accepted challenger▼−7Since October 2026: 9% → 2%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.9% → 2%
Show the five products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
12
SafeBreach0%40%52criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
SafeBreach0%40%52criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%13Mandiant Security Validation0%40%15criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
09
XM Cyber0%10%20accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
XM Cyber0%10%20accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%10NodeZero0%10%10accepted challenger▼−12Since October 2026: 12% → 0%, −12 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement.12% → 0%
11
SCYTHE0%10%10accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
SCYTHE0%10%10accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%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 can't be told apart from repeat variation, and both are shown. Each index measures its own floor from its own repeat, over its own categories, so the floor differs from one index to the next. Both editions asked the same fourteen models. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
For buyers
Head to head
All twenty-eight head-to-head pages: the top eight products, each against each
Cymulate vs Atomic Red TeamCymulate vs AttackIQCymulate vs PenteraCymulate vs Infection MonkeyPicus Security Validation Platform vs AttackIQ FlexPicus Security Validation Platform vs MITRE CalderaPicus Security Validation Platform vs Atomic Red TeamPicus Security Validation Platform vs AttackIQPicus Security Validation Platform vs PenteraPicus Security Validation Platform vs Infection MonkeyAttackIQ Flex vs MITRE CalderaAttackIQ Flex vs Atomic Red TeamAttackIQ Flex vs AttackIQAttackIQ Flex vs PenteraAttackIQ Flex vs Infection MonkeyMITRE Caldera vs Atomic Red TeamMITRE Caldera vs AttackIQMITRE Caldera vs PenteraMITRE Caldera vs Infection MonkeyAtomic Red Team vs AttackIQAtomic Red Team vs PenteraAtomic Red Team vs Infection MonkeyAttackIQ vs PenteraAttackIQ vs Infection MonkeyPentera vs Infection Monkey
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
010203M04
050607I08
09N10
1112M13
Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative50%
Key
01Cymulate35%
Cymulate35%02Picus Security Validation Platform13%
Picus Security Validation Platform13%03AttackIQ Flex13%
AttackIQ Flex13%04MITRE Caldera9%
05Atomic Red Team7%
Atomic Red Team7%06AttackIQ4%
AttackIQ4%07Pentera4%
Pentera4%08Infection Monkey2%
09XM Cyber0%
XM Cyber0%10NodeZero0%
11SCYTHE0%
SCYTHE0%12SafeBreach0%
SafeBreach0%13Mandiant Security Validation0%
What they warned about
Three of fourteen models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Haiku 4.5, Perplexity Sonar, Grok 4.20, Mistral Small, DeepSeek V4 Flash, Qwen 3.7 Flash, Kimi K2, GLM 4.7 FlashX, MiniMax M2.5, GPT-6 Luna and Muse Glimmer 30B changed. A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
SafeBreach40%
21 of 52 labels negative · 11 of 14 models · 5 hard negative
“Approach SafeBreach with the most caution based on the convergence of reported complexity, deployment issues, cost concerns, and marketing/reality gaps.” DeepSeek V4 Flash, negative prompt
Cymulate24%
15 of 62 labels negative · 10 of 14 models · 1 hard negative
“What to avoid if budget is tiny - Cymulate (~$7,000/month = ~$84k/year)” DeepSeek V4 Flash, budget prompt
Picus Security Validation Platform19%
12 of 63 labels negative · 10 of 14 models
“such as SafeBreach, Picus Security, and enterprise AttackIQ) typically cost anywhere from $20,000 to over $100,000 annually” Gemini 3.5 Flash, budget prompt
Pentera33%
13 of 39 labels negative · 9 of 14 models · 4 hard negative
“Received a 70% negative rate in small business recommendations, indicating significant user dissatisfaction” Mistral Small, negative prompt
What they cite
Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted.
Sites the answers cite
74 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 14 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 884 links across 212 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. 59 of the 252 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category; the method page measures whether that reading tilts an answer.
vendor site · G234 answers · 61 citations · 13 models
vendor site · Picus Security30 answers · 44 citations · 12 models
26 answers · 26 citations · 12 models
24 answers · 24 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Cymulate21 answers · 31 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Guideflow21 answers · 22 citations · 9 models
vendor site · SourceForge19 answers · 33 citations · 8 models
19 answers · 26 citations · 10 models
vendor site · AttackIQ19 answers · 24 citations · 9 models
vendor site · SOCRadar19 answers · 19 citations · 8 models
19 answers · 19 citations · 10 models
publisher (Gane)17 answers · 26 citations · 9 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
26 answers · 12 models
24 answers · 11 models
21 answers · 10 models
20 answers · 9 models
19 answers · 8 models
18 answers · 9 models
16 answers · 9 models
13 answers · 9 models
13 answers · 9 models
12 answers · 8 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best breach and attack simulation platform”, “breach and attack simulation platform”, “breach and attack simulation platforms”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days | Best Google position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cymulate cymulate.com | 35% | 177 | 720 | 16 | 16,407 | 3 | ||
| AttackIQ attackiq.com AttackIQ Flex 13%, AttackIQ 4% | 16% | 140 | 1,000 | 9 | 1,414 | 11 | ||
| Picus Security Validation Platform picussecurity.com | 13% | 154 | 20 | 0 | 81,880 | $1,031 | 25 | 3 |
| MITRE Caldera mitre.org | 9% | 18 | 390 | 10 | ||||
| Atomic Red Team atomicredteam.io | 7% | 25 | 880 | 15 | 388 | |||
| Pentera pentera.io | 4% | 123 | 1,900 | 49 | 9,580 | 0 | ||
| Drata drata.com | 4% | 368 | 9,900 | 257 | 36,413 | 54 | ||
| Infection Monkey | 2% | 880 | 11 | |||||
| OpenBAS openbas.io | 2% | 12 | 90 | 2 | ||||
| Vanta vanta.com | 2% | 381 | 40,500 | 1,219 | 72,260 | 120 |
Google's top ten for the three searches hold 19 sites; 4 of them are among the sites the models cited here (g2.com, picussecurity.com, sourceforge.net, startupstash.com). The first result for “best breach and attack simulation platform” is sourceforge.net.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best breach and attack simulation platform for a mid-market B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which security control validation tool would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company?”Comparative“What are the top breach and attack simulation platforms and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best breach and attack simulation platform for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a breach and attack simulation platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which breach and attack simulation platforms should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Haiku 4.5Cymulateno first choiceChangedThe NodeZero PlatformAttackIQ Flex, MITRE Calderano first choicenothing named
Three alternatives
Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, ValidatoThree alternatives
Cymulate, SafeBreach, XM CyberThree alternatives
BreachLock, Rapid7 InsightVM, ValidatoGPT-5.4 miniCymulateagainst: AttackIQ, SafeBreachCymulateHeldAttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platformagainst: XM CyberAttackIQ Flex, Cymulate SMBagainst: Infection Monkeyno first choicenothing named
One alternative
Picus Security Validation PlatformTwo alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation PlatformThree alternatives
Cymulate Exposure Management & Security Validation Platform, Pentera Platform, SafeBreachGemini 3.5 FlashCymulateCymulateHeldagainst: PenteraCymulate, SafeBreachAtomic Red Teamagainst: Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachCymulatenothing named
Two alternatives
Pentera, Picus Security Validation PlatformTwo alternatives
Horizon3.ai NodeZero, Picus Security Validation PlatformFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform, SCYTHE, XM CyberSix alternatives
AttackIQ, Cymulate, Infection Monkey, MITRE Caldera, Prelude Security, Stratus Red TeamFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach, XM CyberPerplexity SonarCymulateagainst: SafeBreachPicus Security Validation PlatformChangedCymulateAttackIQ Flexagainst: Cymulate, Mandiant Security Validation, NodeZero, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachno first choiceagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, FortiTester, Pentera, SafeBreach
Three alternatives
AttackIQ, Horizon3.ai NodeZero, Picus Security Validation PlatformFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Drata, Validato, VantaSeven alternatives
AttackIQ, Mandiant Security Validation, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SCYTHE, SafeBreach, XM CyberTwo alternatives
Atomic Red Team, MITRE CalderaGrok 4.20Cymulateagainst: AttackIQ, SafeBreachPenteraChangedCymulate, Picus Security Validation PlatformMITRE Calderaagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachPicus Security Validation Platformagainst: Atomic Red Team, MITRE Caldera, SCYTHEagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform
Two alternatives
Pentera, Picus Security Validation PlatformFour alternatives
Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach, XM CyberThree alternatives
AttackIQ, SafeBreach, XM CyberThree alternatives
Atomic Red Team, Infection Monkey, Stratus Red TeamFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Cymulate, Pentera, SafeBreachMistral SmallCymulate, Picus Security Validation PlatformCymulateChangedno first choiceAttackIQ Flexagainst: Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platformno first choiceagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach
Two alternatives
Pentera, SakeonThree alternatives
NodeZero, Picus Security Validation Platform, ValidatoDeepSeek V4 FlashCymulateagainst: Pentera, SafeBreachPicus Security Validation PlatformChangedagainst: Mandiant Security Validation, Pentera, SafeBreachCymulateAttackIQ Flexagainst: Cymulate, Mandiant Security Validation, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachCymulateagainst: Cymulate, Pentera, SafeBreach
Two alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation PlatformThree alternatives
AttackIQ, Cymulate, NodeZeroSeven alternatives
AttackIQ, Mandiant Security Validation, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SCYTHE, SafeBreach, XM CyberThree alternatives
Atomic Red Team, MITRE Caldera, NodeZeroThree alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachLlama 4 Maverickno first choiceno first choiceHeldno first choiceAttackIQ Flexagainst: Cymulate, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachno first choiceagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, SafeBreach
Qwen 3.7 FlashPicus Security Validation PlatformDrata, WizChangedCymulate, Picus Security Validation PlatformAttackIQCymulate, Penteraagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, Mandiant Security Validation, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach
Two alternatives
AttackIQ, SafeBreachThree alternatives
Orca Security, Tenable Vulnerability Management, VantaFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Fortinet FortiTester, Pentera, SafeBreachTwo alternatives
Hack The Box, Picus Security Validation PlatformThree alternatives
Bitsight, SecurityScorecard, Tonic LabsKimi K2Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platformagainst: Mandiant Security Validation, SafeBreachCymulateChangedagainst: Mandiant Security Validation, Pentera, SafeBreachPicus Security Validation PlatformAtomic Red Team, MITRE Calderano first choiceagainst: Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach
Two alternatives
AttackIQ, PenteraOne alternative
Picus Security Validation PlatformFive alternatives
AttackIQ, Cymulate, Pentera, SafeBreach, XM CyberSix alternatives
Adaptive Security, Cymulate, Infection Monkey, NodeZero, Picus Security Validation Platform, Stratus Red TeamGLM 4.7 FlashXCymulateAttackIQChangedCymulateAtomic Red Team, MITRE Calderaagainst: AttackIQ Flexno first choiceagainst: Cymulate, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach
Three alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachOne alternative
DrataFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach, XM CyberThree alternatives
Infection Monkey, Picus Security Validation Platform, Revelion AIMiniMax M2.5Cymulate, Picus Security Validation PlatformTenable Vulnerability ManagementChangedCymulateAtomic Red Team, MITRE Calderano first choicenothing named
One alternative
PenteraFour alternatives
Chef InSpec, OpenVAS, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVMFour alternatives
AttackIQ, Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachThree alternatives
Cymulate, Infection Monkey, Stratus Red TeamGPT-6 LunaCymulateagainst: SafeBreachPicus Security Control ValidationChangedno first choiceAttackIQ Flexno first choiceagainst: AttackIQ, Cymulate, FortiTester, Keysight Threat Simulator, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach, XM Cyber
Two alternatives
AttackIQ Flex, Picus Security Validation PlatformOne alternative
CymulateFive alternatives
AttackIQ, Cymulate, Google Cloud Mandiant Security Validation, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachOne alternative
Atomic Red TeamMuse Glimmer 30BCymulateDrata, VantaChangedAttackIQ, Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreachInfection Monkey, OpenBASagainst: Cymulateno first choicenothing named
Two alternatives
AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation PlatformFour alternatives
Hyperproof, LogicGate, Mitratech Alyne, SecureframeFive alternatives
Mandiant Security Validation, Microsoft Attack Simulation Training, NodeZero, Pentera, XM CyberThree alternatives
MITRE Caldera, Picus Security Validation Platform, Prelude OperatorBold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency.
Eighty-four rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct recommendation | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 14:38 | yes | 20 | 9 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 19:32 | yes | 5 | 6 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 14:12 | yes | 11 | 27 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 14:27 | yes | 10 | 5 s |
| Direct recommendation | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 17:06 | yes | 15 | 13 s |
| Direct recommendation | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 09:57 | yes | 5 | 5 s |
| Direct recommendation | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 14:40 | yes | 25 | 26 s |
| Direct recommendation | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 18:13 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Direct recommendation | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 18:04 | yes | 5 | 47 s |
| Direct recommendation | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 13:17 | yes | 10 | 47 s |
| Direct recommendation | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 11:40 | yes | 20 | 67 s |
| Direct recommendation | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 15:42 | yes | 13 | 27 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 13:09 | yes | 4 | 12 s |
| Direct recommendation | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 15:03 | yes | 14 | 25 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 13:37 | no | 0 | 5 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 14:48 | yes | 3 | 6 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 12:52 | no | 0 | 16 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 09:27 | yes | 10 | 3 s |
| Paraphrase | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 16:07 | yes | 5 | 9 s |
| Paraphrase | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 17:40 | yes | 5 | 5 s |
| Paraphrase | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 11:56 | yes | 23 | 19 s |
| Paraphrase | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 15:32 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Paraphrase | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 09:59 | no | 0 | 27 s |
| Paraphrase | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 08:40 | yes | 19 | 20 s |
| Paraphrase | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 15:54 | yes | 24 | 28 s |
| Paraphrase | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 18:59 | no | 0 | 77 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 19:16 | yes | 2 | 13 s |
| Paraphrase | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:15 | yes | 15 | 22 s |
| Comparative | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 18:34 | yes | 9 | 7 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 09:48 | yes | 6 | 10 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 17:19 | yes | 11 | 20 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 16:34 | yes | 10 | 5 s |
| Comparative | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 13:57 | yes | 9 | 13 s |
| Comparative | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 16:09 | yes | 5 | 6 s |
| Comparative | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 09:15 | yes | 25 | 42 s |
| Comparative | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 10:06 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Comparative | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 13:43 | yes | 5 | 22 s |
| Comparative | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 08:58 | yes | 13 | 35 s |
| Comparative | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 17:36 | yes | 23 | 37 s |
| Comparative | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 11:00 | yes | 24 | 40 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 08:54 | yes | 7 | 23 s |
| Comparative | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 11:55 | yes | 23 | 37 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 14:18 | yes | 10 | 9 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 12:39 | yes | 3 | 5 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 10:35 | yes | 2 | 18 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 09:26 | yes | 10 | 3 s |
| Budget constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 17:14 | yes | 9 | 10 s |
| Budget constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 18:00 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Budget constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 14:54 | yes | 23 | 25 s |
| Budget constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 18:12 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Budget constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 17:59 | yes | 8 | 38 s |
| Budget constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 10:48 | yes | 15 | 24 s |
| Budget constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 17:22 | yes | 24 | 74 s |
| Budget constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 19:43 | yes | 15 | 25 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 11:04 | yes | 2 | 12 s |
| Budget constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:59 | yes | 15 | 19 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 14:36 | yes | 18 | 11 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 11:31 | yes | 2 | 7 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 08:56 | no | 0 | 20 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 18:24 | yes | 10 | 6 s |
| Scale constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 15:23 | yes | 15 | 14 s |
| Scale constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 10:34 | no | 0 | 9 s |
| Scale constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 16:13 | yes | 24 | 59 s |
| Scale constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 18:52 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Scale constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 10:06 | no | 0 | 30 s |
| Scale constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 10:24 | yes | 19 | 30 s |
| Scale constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 13:28 | no | 0 | 29 s |
| Scale constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 08:35 | no | 0 | 17 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 17:22 | yes | 3 | 20 s |
| Scale constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 13:18 | yes | 15 | 21 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 19:14 | yes | 17 | 9 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 08:58 | yes | 3 | 5 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 11:05 | yes | 8 | 20 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 10:18 | yes | 10 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:41 | yes | 24 | 15 s |
| Negative framing | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 12:28 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 14:33 | yes | 24 | 32 s |
| Negative framing | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 11:15 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Negative framing | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 17:49 | yes | 5 | 36 s |
| Negative framing | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 16:35 | yes | 25 | 30 s |
| Negative framing | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 13:16 | yes | 25 | 24 s |
| Negative framing | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 12:29 | no | 0 | 29 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 14:05 | yes | 3 | 17 s |
| Negative framing | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 15:21 | yes | 25 | 23 s |
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
Horizon3.ai read as Horizon3.ai NodeZero
Horizon3.ai (NodeZero) read as Horizon3.ai NodeZero
Mandiant read as Mandiant Security Validation
Mandiant (Google Cloud) read as Mandiant Security Validation
Mandiant (formerly FireEye) read as Mandiant Security Validation
Picus read as Picus Security Validation Platform
Picus Security read as Picus Security Validation Platform
Tenable read as Tenable One
Unresolved, counted raw
Chef InSpec
Cymulate Exposure Management & Security Validation Platform
Cymulate SMB
FirstStrike.io
Google Cloud Mandiant Security Validation
Keysight
MITRE ATT&CK Navigator
Pentera Platform
Picus Security Control Validation
Prelude Security (Operator)
Revelion AI
Sakeon
Tonic Labs
Wor
ai
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.