Index › IT › Security operations › OT/IoT security › Tenable OT Security vs Palo Alto Networks OT Security
OT and IoT security · November 2026 Edition
Tenable OT Security vs Palo Alto Networks OT Security
Zero of fourteen models named Tenable OT Security first on the direct prompt; zero named Palo Alto Networks OT Security. Tenable OT Security was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Palo Alto Networks OT Security by twelve and Tenable OT Security carries 27 labels and Palo Alto Networks OT Security 23, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Palo Alto Networks OT Security
accepted challengerNamed in one category this edition.
First-choice share2%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate7%17%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#6#8A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels2723A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Tenable OT Security 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 Tenable OT Security · Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Palo Alto Networks OT Security · Claroty xDome vs Tenable OT Security
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.
Tenable OT SecurityFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPalo Alto Networks OT SecurityDirect001 against Palo Alto Networks OT Security
Paraphrase00
Comparative01
Budget-constrained111 against Tenable OT Security
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against Tenable OT Security · 3 against Palo Alto Networks OT Security
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, Tenable OT Security and Palo Alto Networks OT Security were named in the same answer thirty-three times, of the 78 answers naming Tenable OT Security and the 68 naming Palo Alto Networks OT Security. In those answers Palo Alto Networks OT Security took the first choice one time and Tenable OT Security zero.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Tenable OT Security and Palo Alto Networks OT Security stood in it.
| Model | DirectPA | ParaphrasePA | ComparativePA | Budget-constrainedPA | Scale-constrainedPA | NegativePA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | PA | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | |||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | PA | | |||
| Grok 4.20 | PA | PA | | PA | ||
| Mistral Small | | PA | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | PA | | ||||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | PA | |||
| Kimi K2 | | |||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | PA | PA | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | |||||
| GPT-6 Luna | PA | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | |
Tenable OT SecurityPA Palo Alto Networks OT Security first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Tenable OT Security on the left and Palo Alto Networks OT Security on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Tenable OT Security and Palo Alto Networks OT Security 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 4.5Asimily alternatives: Claroty xDome, Forescout Vistaro Platform, Tenable OT Security
GPT-5.4 miniClaroty xDome alternatives: Fortinet OT Security Platform, Nozomi Networks Guardian, Tenable OT Security
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
GLM 4.7 FlashXFortinet OT Security Platform alternatives: Claroty xDome, Palo Alto Networks OT Security
Muse Glimmer 30BNozomi Networks Guardian alternatives: Claroty xDome, Fortinet OT Security Platform, Microsoft Defender for IoT, Tenable OT Security
Neither was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
DeepSeek V4 FlashMicrosoft Defender for IoT alternatives: Claroty xDome, Nozomi Networks Guardian
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashClaroty xDome alternatives: Armis Centrix, Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian
Kimi K2Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Guardian alternatives: OTORIO, SecuPi
MiniMax M2.5Microsoft Defender for IoT, Nozomi Networks Vantage alternatives: Fortinet OT Security Platform, Palo Alto Networks Zero Trust 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
Palo Alto Networks OT Security leads by two points.
Palo Alto Networks OT Security2%#7 of 11
Tenable OT Security0%#8 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Tenable OT Security2%#6 of 11Palo Alto Networks OT Security2%#8 of 11
The full mid-market standing →Enterprise
Palo Alto Networks OT Security leads by four points.
Palo Alto Networks OT Security4%#7 of 9
Tenable OT Security0%#9 of 9What the models said about Tenable OT Security
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Users report Tenable OT Security pricing can be "higher than expected for smaller plants," making it less ideal for truly limited budgets.” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
“Limited features in some advanced reporting areas, can struggle with deep OT protocol analysis compared to pure-play OT vendors.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“I'd suggest starting with Microsoft Defender for IoT or Tenable OT Security” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Often a simpler choice if your priority is vulnerability/asset visibility, though the available review data suggests it's not always the cheapest option.” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · alternative
“If you already use Tenable for IT vulnerability management, this integrates seamlessly and can be cost-effective as an add-on.” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · alternative
What the models said about Palo Alto Networks OT Security
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“consistently highlight expensive pricing (often the top con...), complex setup/configuration, and a steeper learning curve for OT teams” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Complex setup, steep learning curve, high cost, requires specialized expertise. May be overkill for small operations.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Also noted as a "criticized challenger" with limited positive feedback in recent rankings” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative
“OT appliances start at $2,200-$4,000 with bundles scaling to $7,000-$10,000, making this a more affordable entry point than enterprise solutions.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“converged solutions from vendors like Microsoft, Palo Alto, or Claroty are increasingly preferred” Grok 4.20 · comparative prompt · first choice
“The Premium Choice: Palo Alto Networks ... The Trade-off: It is generally more expensive and has a steeper learning curve than Fortinet.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · alternative
Also compared
Microsoft Defender for IoT vs Tenable OT SecurityMicrosoft Defender for IoT vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityClaroty xDome vs Tenable OT SecurityClaroty xDome vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityNozomi Networks Guardian vs Tenable OT SecurityNozomi Networks Guardian vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityFortinet OT Security Platform vs Tenable OT SecurityFortinet OT Security Platform vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityArmis Centrix vs Tenable OT SecurityArmis Centrix vs Palo Alto Networks OT SecurityTenable OT Security vs Forescout Vistaro PlatformForescout Vistaro Platform 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.