Index › Products › CSC · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

CSC

16Judge labels

1First choices

6Negative labels

10 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10-05.2, 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. CSC was named 3 times in Brand protection, where Red Points led with 40%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business89 of 92

under the label threshold

Mid-market56 of 84

under the label threshold

Enterprise8 of 64

under the label threshold

In brand protection · 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 CSC 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
Brand protection platforms	Marketing	0%	56 of 84	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Red Points at 40%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for CSC yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated CSC across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained3 labels1

Negative4 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative16 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.

“If you want domain consolidation plus brand protection → CSC” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Brand protection · comparative 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.

“compared to bloated, legacy enterprise solutions (like CSC or OpSec)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Brand protection · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as CSC, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CSC was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Red Points16 of 167Not among the top eight

BrandShield15 of 162Not among the top eight

Corsearch13 of 161Not among the top eight

OpSec11 of 160Not among the top eight

MarqVision10 of 160Not among the top eight

Bolster9 of 160Not among the top eight

MarkMonitor7 of 160Not among the top eight

Netcraft6 of 160Not among the top eight

Brand243 of 161Not among the top eight

BrandMentions3 of 161Not among the top eight

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 CSC. 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 15 of the 16 answers that named CSC and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

redpoints.com15

g2.com10

gartner.com10

expertinsights.com9

quasa.io9

thecmo.com9

worldmetrics.org9

spotsaas.com8

guideflow.com7

brandshield.com6

No domain is on file for CSC, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

redpoints.com/blog/best-brand-protection-software14

gartner.com/reviews/market/brand-protection-software10

expertinsights.com/compliance/the-top-brand-protection-solutions9

quasa.io/insights/7-best-brand-protection-platforms-in-2026-ranked-reviewed9

worldmetrics.org/best/brand-protection-software9

thecmo.com/tools/best-brand-protection-software8

guideflow.com/blog/brand-protection-software7

bitsight.com/guides/best-brand-protection-impersonation-monitoring-platforms4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow CSC

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.

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 CSC'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 CSC, 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 CSC by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where CSC 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 CSC, 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.