Leader
30Heralded Score, range 20–54
The most visible vulnerability scanners in France, October 2026
Most cited source
29citations
From Google AI Overviews and ChatGPT
Where engines disagree most
1/4engines put it in their top three
Top three on Google AI Overviews, not on Google AI Mode, Gemini and ChatGPT
Brands
| Rank | Brand | Rank change | Heralded Score All | AI | Search | Score trend | Mentioned | Recommended | By engine | Mentioned by | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | New entry | 30 , range 20–54 | 39#1 | 13#5 | 30
| 25% | 8% | | First reading | |
| 2 | | New entry | 27 , range 19–47 | 37#2 | 9#8 | 27
| 23% | 6% | | First reading | |
| 3 | | New entry | 24 , range 12–48 | 33#3 | 10#6 | 24
| 20% | 2% | | First reading | |
| 4 | | New entry | 14 , range 2–47 | 8= #6 | 24#1 | 14
| 8% | 2% | | First reading | |
| 5 | | New entry | 13 , range 2–46 | 8#8 | 21#2 | 13
| 7% | 3% | | First reading | |
| 6 | | New entry | 11 , range 2–47 | 9#5 | 16#4 | 11
| 9% | 2% | | First reading | |
| 7 | | New entry | 10 , range 2–40 | 6#10 | 16#3 | 10
| 7% | 0% | | First reading | |
| 8 | | New entry | 8 , range 2–37 | 7#9 | 9#7 | 8
| 6% | 2% | None | First reading | |
| 9 | | New entry | 6 , range 3–27 | 10#4 | 0= #18 | 6
| 8% | 1% | None | First reading | |
| 10 | | New entry | 6 , range 2–30 | 8= #6 | 2= #15 | 6
| 7% | 1% | None | First reading |
“=” marks brands whose score ranges overlap, so the test cannot separate them. Every brand named in at least three answers is ranked. AI and Search give each brand’s score and rank on that side alone. By engine has one dot per engine (ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, Gemini and Google AI Mode), darker the more often it names the brand.
Most cited sources
| Rank | Source | Type | Cited in | Engines | Pages cited | Brands its pages mention |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | Reference | 18.3% | 2 of 4 | 23 | Not read |
| 2 | | Regulator | 11.7% | 1 of 4 | 13 | Not read |
| 3 | | Community | 11.7% | 1 of 4 | 13 | 2 |
| 4 | | Social | 13.3% | 2 of 4 | 12 | Not read |
| 5 | | Vendor site | 11.7% | 2 of 4 | 4 | 1 |
| 6 | | Community | 10.0% | 3 of 4 | 6 | Not read |
| 7 | | Vendor site | 8.3% | 3 of 4 | 3 | 8 |
| 8 | | Vendor site | 1.7% | 1 of 4 | 5 | Not read |
| 9 | | Community | 1.7% | 1 of 4 | 5 | Not read |
| 10 | | Vendor site | 6.7% | 1 of 4 | 4 | Not read |
Questions asked
| Question | Language | Most recommended |
|---|---|---|
| how do application scans compare with dependency checks for finding vulnerabilities | English | No brand recommended |
| should developers or security teams own vulnerability scanning | English | No brand recommended |
| what can replace manual security checks before each software release | English | No brand recommended |
| how can we replace spreadsheets for tracking software vulnerabilities | English | |
| what can replace separate scanners for code and dependencies | English | |
Each engine's top three
Related leaderboards
Method
Each leaderboard ranks brands on two sides. AI is how ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode answer the board's buyer questions. Search is Google's top 10 results for the keywords behind those questions. All combines the two, where Search is measured.
For the AI side, each month Heralded asks every engine the same buyer questions, twice each, and reads every answer. An answer counts 0 for a brand it leaves out, 50 for a brand it names and 100 for a brand it recommends, and the Heralded Score is built from those. A brand named in at least three answers gets a score and a place.