Every category where a model named Secure Privacy 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
Consent and privacy management	GTM data and infrastructure	0%	14 of 39	0%	11	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Secure Privacy yet. The next is due October 1, 2026. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	1	3
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	1	2

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

Direct7 labels2

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative8 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained7 labelsNone

Negative11 labels2not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative37 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 5 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.

“Highest ratings (4.9/5), transparent pricing, full governance suite” Kimi K2 · Consent · negative prompt · first choice

“Test via trials (e.g., Enzuzo, Ketch, Secure Privacy score higher: 4.6–4.9/5)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Consent · negative prompt · alternative

“Better-rated options mentioned in research include ... Secure Privacy” MiniMax M2.5 · Consent · negative prompt · alternative

“Budget-conscious: Secure Privacy or Usercentrics” Mistral Small · Consent · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Secure Privacy, over the 37 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Secure Privacy was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OneTrust35 of 3713Not in the top three

Cookiebot28 of 373Not in the top three

TrustArc27 of 370Not in the top three

Osano25 of 372Not in the top three

Usercentrics23 of 371Not in the top three

Didomi21 of 370Not in the top three

Ketch20 of 377Not in the top three

CookieYes18 of 375Not in the top three

Enzuzo11 of 372Not in the top three

consentmanager10 of 370Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 Secure Privacy. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 2 of the 37 answers that named Secure Privacy and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

didomi.io2

enzuzo.com2

expertinsights.com2

osano.com2

secureprivacy.aiYour site2

comparitech.com1

consently.net1

cookieyes.com1

elementor.com1

ethyca.com1

Thirteen of the fifteen domain citations in answers naming Secure Privacy came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

didomi.io/blog/top-10-best-consent-management-platforms-cmp2

enzuzo.com/blog/best-consent-management-platforms2

expertinsights.com/compliance/the-top-consent-management-solutions2

osano.com/comparison/consent-management-platform2

secureprivacy.ai/blog/best-cmp-20262

comparitech.com/data-privacy-management/best-consent-management-platforms1

consently.net/blog/best-consent-management-platform1

cookieyes.com/blog/best-consent-management-platforms1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Secure Privacy

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Secure Privacy; a claim can dispute any of them.

CookieYes/Secure Privacy 1Secure Privacy / Consently 1

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 Secure Privacy'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 Secure Privacy, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at secureprivacy.ai is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.