Index › IT › Security operations › OT/IoT security › Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Nozomi Networks Guardian
OT and IoT security · November 2026 Edition
Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Nozomi Networks Guardian
Five of fourteen models named Microsoft Defender for IoT first on the direct prompt; two named Nozomi Networks Guardian. Microsoft Defender for IoT was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Nozomi Networks Guardian by fourteen and Microsoft Defender for IoT carries 49 labels and Nozomi Networks Guardian 51, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Microsoft Defender for IoT
endorsed leaderNamed in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share38%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate8%24%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#3A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels4951A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Microsoft Defender for IoT reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Claroty xDome was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Claroty xDome · Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Fortinet OT Security Platform · Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Armis Centrix
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 OT and IoT security page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Microsoft Defender for IoTFirst choices, of fourteen modelsNozomi Networks Guardian
Direct52
Paraphrase722 against Nozomi Networks Guardian
Comparative13
Budget-constrained707 against Nozomi Networks Guardian
Scale-constrained00
Negative014 against Microsoft Defender for IoT · 3 against Nozomi Networks Guardian
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.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Microsoft Defender for IoT and Nozomi Networks Guardian were named in the same answer 101 times, of the 151 answers naming Microsoft Defender for IoT and the 146 naming Nozomi Networks Guardian. In those answers Nozomi Networks Guardian took the first choice sixteen times and Microsoft Defender for IoT twenty-six.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Microsoft Defender for IoT and Nozomi Networks Guardian stood in it.
| Model | DirectMD | ParaphraseMD | ComparativeMD | Budget-constrainedMD | Scale-constrainedMD | NegativeMD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | MD | MD | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | MD | MD | MD | MD | ||
| Perplexity Sonar | MD | MD | MD | MD | MD | |
| Grok 4.20 | | MD | MD | MD | MD | |
| Mistral Small | MD | MD | MD | MD | ||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | MD | MD | MD | MD | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | MD | MD | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | MD | MD | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | MD | MD | MD | | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | MD | MD | MD | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | MD | MD | | MD | ||
| GPT-6 Luna | MD | MD | MD | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | MD | MD | | MD |
MD Microsoft Defender for IoT Nozomi Networks GuardianMD first choiceMD named as an alternativeMD argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Microsoft Defender for IoT on the left and Nozomi Networks Guardian on the right.
Nozomi Networks GuardianMD first choiceMD named as an alternativeMD argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Microsoft Defender for IoT on the left and Nozomi Networks Guardian on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Microsoft Defender for IoT and Nozomi Networks Guardian stood in it.
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.Kimi K2Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian alternatives: OTORIO, SecuPi
Microsoft Defender for IoT first, Nozomi Networks Guardian an alternative
4 of 14 modelsNozomi Networks Guardian was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarMicrosoft Defender for IoT alternatives: Fortinet OT Security Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Tenable OT Security
Mistral SmallClaroty xDome, Microsoft Defender for IoT alternatives: Dragos Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Tenable OT Security
DeepSeek V4 FlashMicrosoft Defender for IoT alternatives: Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian
MiniMax M2.5Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Vantage alternatives: Fortinet OT Security Platform, Palo Alto Networks Zero Trust OT Security
Nozomi Networks Guardian first, Microsoft Defender for IoT an alternative
1 of 14 modelsMicrosoft Defender for IoT was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Muse Glimmer 30BNozomi Networks Guardian alternatives: Claroty xDome, Fortinet OT Security Platform, Microsoft Defender for IoT, Tenable OT Security
Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniClaroty xDome alternatives: Fortinet OT Security Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Tenable OT Security
Gemini 3.5 FlashClaroty xDome alternatives: Armis Centrix, Fortinet OT Security Platform, Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian
Grok 4.20Claroty xDome alternatives: Dragos Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian
Qwen 3.7 FlashClaroty xDome alternatives: Armis Centrix, Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian
Neither was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Asimily alternatives: Claroty xDome, Forescout Vistaro Platform, Tenable OT Security
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
GLM 4.7 FlashXFortinet OT Security Platform alternatives: Claroty xDome, Palo Alto Networks OT Security
GPT-6 LunaClaroty xDome alternatives: Nozomi Vantage
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
Microsoft Defender for IoT leads by forty-two points.
Microsoft Defender for IoT49%#1 of 11
Nozomi Networks Guardian7%#4 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
Microsoft Defender for IoT leads by thirty points.
Microsoft Defender for IoT38%#1 of 11
Nozomi Networks Guardian8%#3 of 11Enterprise
Microsoft Defender for IoT leads by eight points.
Microsoft Defender for IoT19%#2 of 9
Nozomi Networks Guardian11%#3 of 9What the models said about Microsoft Defender for IoT
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“often criticized for requiring integration with separate SIEM and SOAR tools, which can complicate deployment” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative
“Microsoft Defender for IoT is generally well-regarded but can feel basic if not combined with others.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Microsoft Defender for IoT has been criticized for its premium pricing and complex deployments.” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · soft negative
“The top results suggest that Microsoft Defender for IoT is a recommended industrial and IoT device security tool for mid-sized B2B companies.” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Start with Microsoft Defender for IoT if you're already in the Microsoft ecosystem—it's the most cost-effective entry point” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Defender for IoT OT site license XS at ~$70/mo per site up to 100 devices is the most accessible commercial starting point.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Nozomi Networks Guardian
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid premium OT-native leaders like Claroty ... or Nozomi (great passive sensors)” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Most enterprise-grade platforms (like Dragos, Claroty, or Nozomi Networks) cost $100,000+ annually, which is out of reach for small budgets.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · soft negative
“Check ownership implications, roadmap control, data residency, and contract terms because it is now owned by Mitsubishi Electric.” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Nozomi Networks Guardian / Vantage. Passive, agentless discovery and multi-site cloud console is the most cited fit for manufacturers with limited SOC staff.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose Nozomi/Dragos if you want to understand the commands being sent and prevent malicious manipulation of physical processes.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“My default recommendation: Nozomi Networks Guardian, with Vantage for centralized management if you have multiple sites.” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Claroty xDomeMicrosoft Defender for IoT vs Fortinet OT Security PlatformMicrosoft Defender for IoT vs Armis CentrixMicrosoft Defender for IoT vs Tenable OT SecurityMicrosoft Defender for IoT vs Forescout Vistaro PlatformMicrosoft Defender for IoT vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityClaroty xDome vs Nozomi Networks GuardianNozomi Networks Guardian vs Fortinet OT Security PlatformNozomi Networks Guardian vs Armis CentrixNozomi Networks Guardian vs Tenable OT SecurityNozomi Networks Guardian vs Forescout Vistaro PlatformNozomi Networks Guardian vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full ot/iot security 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.