3 categories · RankedPentera
Pentera is an automated security validation platform that also covers breach and attack simulation · pentera.io ↗
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.
Vanta is first at 20%.
Cymulate is first at 35%. 0 of 14 models made it the first choice when asked directly.
Cymulate is first at 27%.
Why models recommend it
“I recommend Pentera as the top security control validation tool for a mid-sized B2B company.”Grok 4.20 · Paraphrase question · first choice
“Pentera: Highly automated, focuses heavily on remediation workflows and risk scoring.”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Scale-constrained question · first choice
“Pentera (formerly Pcysys) built its platform around automated, agentless validation of internal and external attack surfaces”Claude Haiku 4.5 · Direct question · alternative
“If automation and vulnerability identification are top priorities, Pentera is also worth considering despite higher pricing.”MiniMax M2.5 · Direct question · alternative
What gives them pause
“Received a 70% negative rate in small business recommendations, indicating significant user dissatisfaction”Mistral Small · Negative question · warning
“Avoid committing immediately to platforms such as SafeBreach, Pentera, or Mandiant”Perplexity Sonar · Budget-constrained question · warning
“What to avoid if budget is tiny - Pentera (~$75k+/year)”DeepSeek V4 Flash · Budget-constrained question · warning
“it holds a high negative rate (~70%) for SMBs”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Negative question · warning
Also on the shortlist
The products named in the same answers as Pentera, over the 133 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 117 | 43 | Compare → | |
| 112 | 27 | Compare → | |
| 108 | 7 | View → | |
| 96 | 10 | Compare → | |
| 38 | 0 | View → | |
| 35 | 0 | View → | |
| 26 | 1 | View → | |
| 23 | 6 | Compare → | |
| 22 | 0 | View → | |
| 17 | 11 | Compare → |
What the models named instead of Pentera →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
At a glance
Stated on Pentera's own site, not checked by Gane.
- For
- organizations
- Certifications
- ISO 27001, ISO 42001, ISO 9001, SOC 2 Type II, SOC 3
- Hosting
- EU
- Customers named
- Telefonica, Casey’s, Merlin Entertainments, EDEKA, ALDO Group, DTCC, Azul Airlines, SCHMITZ CARGOBULL
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 123 of the 133 answers that named Pentera and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
410 of the 453 domain citations in answers naming Pentera came from a third party's page. Forty-three 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 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5 |
What it publishes
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 156 | 10 | 2026-09-12 | ASM, EDR | |
| News or press | 117 | 4 | 2026-09-03 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 77 | 2 | 2026-08-28 | ASM, PTaaS | |
| Report or ebook | 47 | 6 | 2026-08-17 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 41 | 2 | 2026-08-25 | PTaaS, EDR | |
| Case study | 38 | 0 | 2026-04-08 | ||
| Podcast or video | 36 | 1 | 2026-08-25 | ||
| Conference or event | 6 | 0 | 2025-11-13 | ||
| Comparison | 4 | 0 | 2024-10-08 | ||
| Template or tool | 1 | 0 | 2022-09-19 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-12Pentera for financial services blog
- 2026-09-12Pentera for healthcare services blog
- 2026-09-03Pentera named gartner peer insights customers choice 2026 blog
- 2026-09-03Pentera named gartner peer insights customers choice 2026 news or press
- 2026-09-01Pentera for gov blog
- 2026-08-28Threat led penetration testing glossary or explainer
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page pentera.io 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.