Breach and attack simulation · November 2026 Edition
MITRE Caldera vs Pentera
Zero of fourteen models named MITRE Caldera first on the direct prompt; zero named Pentera. MITRE Caldera was named by nine of the fourteen models and Pentera by fourteen and MITRE Caldera carries 11 labels and Pentera 39, so the shares are not directly comparable.
MITRE Caldera
accepted challengerNamed in one category this edition.
Named in three categories this edition.
First-choice share9%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate9%33%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#7A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1139A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, MITRE Caldera reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Picus Security Validation Platform was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Cymulate vs MITRE Caldera · Cymulate vs Pentera · Picus Security Validation Platform vs MITRE Caldera
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; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the breach and attack simulation page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
MITRE CalderaFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPentera
Direct001 against Pentera
Paraphrase013 against Pentera
Comparative00
Budget-constrained504 against Pentera
Scale-constrained011 against MITRE Caldera
Negative005 against Pentera
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where MITRE Caldera and Pentera stood in it.
| Model | DirectMC | ParaphraseMC | ComparativeMC | Budget-constrainedMC | Scale-constrainedMC | NegativeMC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | MC | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | MC | |||
| Perplexity Sonar | | MC | | |||
| Grok 4.20 | | | MC | MC | ||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | MC | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | |||
| Kimi K2 | | | | MC | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | MC | | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | MC | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | ||||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | MC |
MC MITRE Caldera PenteraMC first choiceMC named as an alternativeMC argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, MITRE Caldera on the left and Pentera on the right.
PenteraMC first choiceMC named as an alternativeMC argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, MITRE Caldera on the left and Pentera on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where MITRE Caldera and Pentera stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Cymulate alternatives: Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform, Validato
Gemini 3.5 FlashCymulate alternatives: Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform
Grok 4.20Cymulate alternatives: Pentera, Picus Security Validation Platform
Mistral SmallCymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform alternatives: Pentera, Sakeon
Kimi K2Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform alternatives: AttackIQ, Pentera
MiniMax M2.5Cymulate, Picus Security Validation Platform alternatives: Pentera
Neither was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniCymulate alternatives: Picus Security Validation Platform
Perplexity SonarCymulate alternatives: AttackIQ, Horizon3.ai NodeZero, Picus Security Validation Platform
DeepSeek V4 FlashCymulate alternatives: AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashPicus Security Validation Platform alternatives: AttackIQ, SafeBreach
GLM 4.7 FlashXCymulate alternatives: AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform, SafeBreach
GPT-6 LunaCymulate alternatives: AttackIQ Flex, Picus Security Validation Platform
Muse Glimmer 30BCymulate alternatives: AttackIQ, Picus Security Validation Platform
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
MITRE Caldera leads by two points.
MITRE Caldera4%#– of 11
Pentera2%#7 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
MITRE Caldera leads by five points.
MITRE Caldera9%#4 of 13
Pentera4%#7 of 13Enterprise
The order flips: Pentera leads at enterprise.
Pentera7%#5 of 8MITRE Caldera0%#– of 8
The full enterprise standing →What the models said about MITRE Caldera
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“Open-source alternatives (e.g., MITRE Caldera, Atomic Red Team) can supplement but usually lack the enterprise polish” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · soft negative
“free and open-source BAS tools like MITRE Caldera and Prelude Operator offer powerful capabilities for simulating adversary behaviors without any licensing fees” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“MITRE Caldera (or a combination with Atomic Red Team) is the best breach and attack simulation (BAS) option for a company with a limited budget.” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · first choice
“Start free: Deploy Atomic Red Team or MITRE Caldera to establish baseline testing” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Pentera
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Received a 70% negative rate in small business recommendations, indicating significant user dissatisfaction” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid committing immediately to platforms such as SafeBreach, Pentera, or Mandiant” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
“What to avoid if budget is tiny - Pentera (~$75k+/year)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“I recommend Pentera as the top security control validation tool for a mid-sized B2B company.” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Pentera: Highly automated, focuses heavily on remediation workflows and risk scoring.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“Pentera (formerly Pcysys) built its platform around automated, agentless validation of internal and external attack surfaces” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · alternative
Also compared
Cymulate vs MITRE CalderaCymulate vs PenteraPicus Security Validation Platform vs MITRE CalderaPicus Security Validation Platform vs PenteraAttackIQ Flex vs MITRE CalderaAttackIQ Flex vs PenteraMITRE Caldera vs Atomic Red TeamMITRE Caldera vs AttackIQMITRE Caldera vs Infection MonkeyAtomic Red Team vs PenteraAttackIQ vs PenteraPentera vs Infection MonkeyAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full BAS standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.