Client-side protection · RankedFeroot PaymentGuard
Feroot PaymentGuard is a browser-based client-side security platform that continuously monitors the JavaScript running on web pages, including live checkout behavior · feroot.com ↗
Read the same way at every company size.
The standing depends on who is buying. Every model is asked the same questions for each company size.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is first at 19%.
cside is first at 18%.
Feroot Security is first at 16%.
Why models recommend it
“I'd recommend starting with Feroot PaymentGuard or Cside”Claude Haiku 4.5 · Paraphrase question · first choice
“Choose Feroot when compliance automation across multiple regulations is the main buying criterion.”Perplexity Sonar · Comparative question · alternative
“Feroot focuses on identifying and patching vulnerabilities within the client-side code itself”GLM 4.7 FlashX · Comparative question · alternative
What gives them pause
“those from Reflectiz, Feroot, Human Security, Imperva Client-Side Protection, Source Defense ... ineffective against sophisticated attacks”Grok 4.20 · Negative question · warning
“tools to be cautious about or avoid include: ... 3. Feroot PaymentGuard”Llama 4 Maverick · Negative question · warning
“Feroot samples down to 10% of sessions, meaning it statistically misses 90% of client-side attacks in unobserved sessions”Claude Haiku 4.5 · Comparative question · warning
“Dedicated client-side security platforms (like Jscrambler, Feroot, or HUMAN) can be very expensive.”Gemini 3.5 Flash · Budget-constrained question · warning
Also on the shortlist
The products named in the same answers as Feroot PaymentGuard, over the 42 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34 | 5 | Compare → | |
| 26 | 11 | Compare → | |
| 26 | 1 | View → | |
| 25 | 4 | Compare → | |
| 24 | 1 | View → | |
| 24 | 0 | Compare → | |
| 13 | 2 | View → | |
| 13 | 0 | View → | |
| 9 | 3 | View → | |
| 5 | 0 | View → |
What the models named instead of Feroot PaymentGuard →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
At a glance
Stated on Feroot PaymentGuard's own site, not checked by Gane.
- For
- payment pages
- Price stated
- Contact Feroot for a custom quote tailored to your specific needs.
- Free plan or trial
- free PageScanner tool
- Certifications
- SOC 2 Type II, PCI DSS
- Customers named
- Gusto
How this is measured
Fourteen AI models from 12 labs are asked the same buying questions six ways, for three company sizes. Standings refresh every edition.
Gane sells AI visibility software. No company can pay to change a result.
Read the method →Sources returned with these answers
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. These counts come from 41 of the 42 answers that named Feroot PaymentGuard and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
133 of the 176 domain citations in answers naming Feroot PaymentGuard came from a third party's page. Twenty-seven were to the publisher's own pages (the Gane Index), which the models cite like any other source; they are not counted as a third party.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Warning | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What it publishes
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 310 | 2 | 2026-09-23 | GRC | |
| Glossary or explainer | 132 | 0 | 2025-11-25 | SIEM, Compliance automation | |
| News or press | 51 | 2 | 2026-09-23 | ||
| Comparison | 20 | 0 | 2026-06-25 | ||
| Conference or event | 13 | 0 | 2026-04-16 | GRC | |
| Template or tool | 8 | 0 | 2026-04-28 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 4 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 3 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-09-23Feroot expands dxcomply with code free consent auditing for native mobile apps news or press
- 2026-09-23The consent compliance paradox blog
- 2026-08-21Beyond the compliance snapshot why grc needs continuous evidence blog
- 2026-07-31Ivan tsarynny on cnbc ai regulation should empower defenders not limit their ability to defend news or press
- 2026-06-25Cookie consent vs gdpr compliance why network traffic matters more than banners comparison
- 2026-06-18What canadas bill c 36 means for ai powered digital experiences blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page feroot.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.