Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 78 → 73 of 107
Netwrix · 1 category · Named, not rankedNetwrix Auditor
4Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
3 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
3 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Netwrix Auditor was named 3 times in Internal controls, where FloQast led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business74 of 111
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Mid-market31 of 90
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In internal controls · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Netwrix Auditor for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal controls and SOX | Tax and compliance | 0% | 31 of 90 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by FloQast at 25% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Netwrix Auditor held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 10 points.
Best category · Internal controls · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 26 → 31 of 88
EnterprisegoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsNot ranked
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal controls | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 10-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 26 → 31 of 90 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 10 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Netwrix Auditor across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Netwrix Auditor across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Best if you need IT-focused evidence automation: Netwrix Auditor, which automates ITGC evidence generation” Perplexity Sonar · Internal controls · budget prompt · alternative
“best when your main pain point is IT evidence collection in Microsoft-heavy environments” Perplexity Sonar · Internal controls · direct prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Netwrix Auditor, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Netwrix Auditor was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Netwrix Auditor, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Netwrix Auditor was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Netwrix Auditor. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 4 of the 4 answers that named Netwrix Auditor and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
highradius.com4
netwrix.comYour site4
riskpublishing.com4
zipdo.co3
exabeam.com2
gitnux.org2
itechguides.com2
mitti.com2
optro.ai2
riskwatch.com2
Twenty-three of the twenty-seven domain citations in answers naming Netwrix Auditor came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
netwrix.com ranks 2 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Netwrix Auditor takes 0% of first choices and FloQast takes 25%.ShowHide
Search and answers
netwrix.com ranks 2 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Netwrix Auditor takes 0% of first choices and FloQast takes 25%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “internal controls tools”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “sox compliance software”
–
not in the top ten
- Its company's site
- netwrix.com shared with Netwrix's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 104,208 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 17,554 · 1,072 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 7,338
- Paid Google search
- 4 searches its ads show for, about 67 clicks and $3,789 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 31 of 90 in internal controls
Segment leader
25%
FloQast
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 4 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 4 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as Netwrix Auditor
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Netwrix Auditor; a claim can dispute any of them.
Netwrix 1
Follow Netwrix Auditor
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Netwrix is the company behind Netwrix Auditor.ShowHide
The company
Netwrix is the company behind Netwrix Auditor.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- a very useful and efficient auditing tool
- For
- Organizations that are currently using Netwrix Auditor
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What Netwrix Auditor's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: community.netwrix.com/t/netwrix-auditor-9-5/115182, community.netwrix.com/t/netwrix-auditor-integration/14994, community.netwrix.com/t/migration-of-audit-trail-from-netwrix-auditor/12243, community.netwrix.com/t/auditing-dell-powerstore-with-netwrix-auditor/109359, community.netwrix.com/t/last-logon-report-in-netwrix-enterprise-auditor/114789. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Netwrix Auditor's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Netwrix Auditor, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Netwrix Auditor by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Netwrix Auditor is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Netwrix Auditor, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.