Splunk moved from working to leader tier — CrowdStrike leads at 92 GPI · Cybersecurity · 31 May 2026
Editorial summary based on observed model outputs and daily index facts.
Top 10 Cybersecurity brands by GPI
Snapshot: 31 May 2026 · Period: 2026-Q2 · Niche: Cybersecurity · Comparison baseline: 22 May 2026.
What changed since last issue
Quick signal scan versus 22 May 2026: 3 brands moved up and 5 moved down in today's top set.
| Top movers | Delta GPI |
|---|---|
| Splunk | +9 |
| Rapid7 | −4 |
| Trend Micro | +3 |
Two findings,
thirty seconds.
1. Splunk moved from working to leader tier → TIER_BREAKTHROUGH
2. Symantec splits by persona cohorts with a 79-point gap → PERSONA_SPLIT
What this means for the market
This daily Cybersecurity snapshot is useful because it shows which brands language models make easy to recommend. CrowdStrike leads with 92 GPI, but the practical question is where assistants explain alternatives, cite sources, or shift users toward a specific provider.
Splunk has the clearest positive movement (+9 vs 22 May 2026), while Rapid7 is the main negative signal (−4). For marketing and search teams, that means checking the prompts, product claims, and official pages that models can quote when answering comparison or buying-intent questions.
The main automatic signal in this issue is "Splunk moved from working to leader tier", which helps separate a simple table move from a change in how models frame recommendations. GPI is not market share or revenue forecast; it is an observability layer for AI recommendations. Small moves are directional, while repeated movement across issues should trigger content, citation, and positioning review.
What changed since last issue
Leader change: CrowdStrike remained #1.
Top 3 movers: Splunk (+9), Rapid7 (−4), Trend Micro (+3).
Top 10 continuity: 8/10 brands are carried from the prior issue using canonical brand matching. First-time names are isolated in a separate block below and not treated as confirmed roster change yet.
Baseline comparability: this issue compares with 22 May 2026 using the same niche and daily methodology. Brand continuity is matched by canonical brand key, and first-time entrants are shown in a separate block until confirmed in the next issue.
Trust & Coverage
Only treat moves >5 GPI with Medium+ confidence as strategic signal.
Visibility by AI model
Top 5 brands split by model-level visibility in this issue. Use this to see where a brand is strong, weak, or absent across assistant ecosystems.
Insights this issue
Splunk moved from working to leader tier
Splunk improved from 62 to 71 GPI (+9).
Splunk crossed a tier boundary with a move from 62 to 71 GPI (working -> leader).
Why it matters: A tier crossing indicates a structural gain in recommendation visibility, not just a small fluctuation.
Methodology: Only brands present in the niche brand dictionary are eligible for this card.
Symantec splits by persona cohorts with a 79-point gap
Q&A persona scores 79 GPI while Shopping persona scores 0.
Symantec is framed differently across personas: Q&A persona at 79 GPI versus Shopping persona at 0 GPI.
Why it matters: Signals potential audience framing bias across model personas.
Updated 31 May 2026, 10:40 UTC. Source: Getllmspy GPI daily index.
Methodology & caveats
GPI measures AI visibility and framing in model answers, not sales or market share forecasts. This issue is generated from index layers (prompts, measurements, aggregates, narrative, reports) with deterministic daily runs.
No synthetic brands or synthetic scores are injected. If the quarter lacks coverage, we show fewer rows and mark insufficiency explicitly.
Glossary: GPI · LLM visibility · share of voice.
Data updates timeline
Each bar shows how many measurements were refreshed on that date. Last data update: 26 May 2026.
Report refreshed: 31 May 2026 (report rebuilt from latest available measurements).
Prompts used in this issue (16)
Prompt pack extracted from completed checks included in this daily slice.
| # | Prompt text |
|---|---|
| 1 | Name up to 10 brands, companies, or services that **directly** operate in the «Cybersecurity» niche in in the United States (not adjacent “marketing in general”). Briefly justify the order. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 2 | Which **direct** providers of the «Cybersecurity» service/product do you most often name for users in in the United States? Do not mix in generic SEO/SMM tools unless they explicitly sell this niche. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 3 | Which companies **explicitly position** as «Cybersecurity» players and are considered strong in in the United States? Exclude vendors that are only “in digital marketing” without this exact offering. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 4 | Who gets criticized most in «Cybersecurity» in in the United States and for what? In the brand list, include only those criticized as providers of this niche—not any random SEO shop. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 5 | If you recommended the «Cybersecurity» offering to a friend in in the United States, who would you name first among **direct** players? Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 6 | Which **specialized** «Cybersecurity» services (not generic course platforms or full-service agencies without this explicit niche) show up most in discussions in in the United States? Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 7 | Among **core** «Cybersecurity» players in in the United States, who signals premium pricing vs affordability? Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 8 | Which **core** «Cybersecurity» companies in in the United States are mentioned more often in a positive light lately? Do not pad the list with adjacent brands. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 9 | Name up to 10 brands, companies, or services that **directly** operate in the «Cybersecurity» niche in in GLOBAL (not adjacent “marketing in general”). Briefly justify the order. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 10 | Which **direct** providers of the «Cybersecurity» service/product do you most often name for users in in GLOBAL? Do not mix in generic SEO/SMM tools unless they explicitly sell this niche. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 11 | Which companies **explicitly position** as «Cybersecurity» players and are considered strong in in GLOBAL? Exclude vendors that are only “in digital marketing” without this exact offering. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 12 | Who gets criticized most in «Cybersecurity» in in GLOBAL and for what? In the brand list, include only those criticized as providers of this niche—not any random SEO shop. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 13 | If you recommended the «Cybersecurity» offering to a friend in in GLOBAL, who would you name first among **direct** players? Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 14 | Which **specialized** «Cybersecurity» services (not generic course platforms or full-service agencies without this explicit niche) show up most in discussions in in GLOBAL? Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 15 | Among **core** «Cybersecurity» players in in GLOBAL, who signals premium pricing vs affordability? Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
| 16 | Which **core** «Cybersecurity» companies in in GLOBAL are mentioned more often in a positive light lately? Do not pad the list with adjacent brands. Important: in the structured brand list, include only players that directly match the niche wording (they clearly sell that service/product). Do not pad with adjacent marketing vendors: generic SEO/SMM agencies, social schedulers, rank trackers, link marketplaces, or training platforms unless they explicitly market this exact niche. If unsure, omit the brand from the structured list and state the caveat in prose only. |
FAQ for Cybersecurity
How should executives read this Cybersecurity daily report?
Treat GPI movement above 5 points with medium or high confidence as strategic signal. Smaller shifts are directional and should be monitored over consecutive daily issues against baseline 22 May 2026.
Does this report measure market share?
No. GPI reflects AI recommendation visibility and framing quality across model answers, not revenue or shipment share.
How often is this report refreshed?
Daily pipeline runs rebuild this issue from the latest completed measurements, then publish a dated snapshot for comparison.
How should we use new entrants in decisions?
Treat first-time entrants as provisional until they appear in consecutive issues with medium or high evidence.
Which signals matter most in the Cybersecurity leaderboard?
For Cybersecurity, read rank together with GPI movement, evidence points, and model-level visibility. A brand that is strong in one model but absent in another needs a different response than a brand with broad but flat visibility.
Why can Cybersecurity rankings move between daily issues?
Daily movement usually comes from changes in model answers, prompt mix, cited sources, and how clearly official brand pages answer buying or comparison questions in this category.
Explore other daily reports
All daily niches
Every benchmark uses the same methodology so GPI movement is comparable across categories.
Check how AI recommends your brand next.
Run your own visibility snapshot across major LLMs and see where you rank, who wins citations, and what changed week over week. You get a dated, comparable report your leadership team can trust.