Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Enterprise Firewalls

Hardware and software firewall appliances and virtual instances that provide perimeter and internal segmentation for large organizations, offering stateful inspection, TLS inspection, and centralized management.

Brands tracked: 32
Brands analyzed: 32
Last updated: 2026-04-22
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 257
Total responses: 1,295
Top Brand Overall?
Fortinet
94/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Microsoft
100

Highest score on the LBA metric.

Authority Leader?
Fortinet
95

Highest score on the Authority metric.

TOM Leader?
Palo Alto Networks
100

Highest score on the TOM metric.

Fortinet is the default answer in AI responses for Enterprise Firewalls

Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks together dominate AI responses for Enterprise Firewalls. Both brands consistently surface unprompted, with the model treating them as the default answers for most category queries. Brands outside the top two face a structural disadvantage: users are usually given these two before the model even considers alternatives.

Brand Leaderboard All 32 Enterprise Firewalls brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
Fortinet
fortinet.com
 91
95
97
94
2
Palo Alto Networks
paloaltonetworks.com
 84
88
100
90
3
Cisco
cisco.com
 83
53
85
72
4
Check Point
checkpoint.com
 77
50
89
70
5
Sophos
sophos.com
 89
20
57
47
6
Zscaler
zscaler.com
 80
2
4
8
7
SonicWall
sonicwall.com
 75
0
27
3
8
Juniper Networks
juniper.net
 71
0
10
2
9
Microsoft
microsoft.com
 100
5
0
2
10
Barracuda
barracuda.com
 81
0
4
1
11
Forcepoint
forcepoint.com
 55
0
4
1
12
H3C
h3c.com
 53
0
1
1
13
Hillstone Networks
hillstonenet.com
 58
0
1
1
14
Huawei
huawei.com
 62
0
2
1
15
AhnLab
ahnlab.com
 50
0
0
0
16
Cato Networks
catonetworks.com
 77
0
0
0
17
Clavister
clavister.com
 48
0
0
0
18
Endian
endian.com
 43
0
0
0
19
GajShield
gajshield.com
 7
0
0
0
20
IPFire
ipfire.org
 58
0
0
0
21
Kerio
kerio.com
 58
0
0
0
22
Netgate
netgate.com
 71
0
0
0
23
NSFOCUS
nsfocusglobal.com
 58
0
0
0
24
OPNsense
opnsense.org
 75
0
0
0
25
Ruijie Networks
ruijienetworks.com
 32
0
0
0
26
Sangfor
sangfor.com
 56
0
0
0
27
Stormshield
stormshield.com
 49
0
0
0
28
T
TOPSEC
topsec.com.cn
 39
0
0
0
29
Untangle
untangle.com
 59
0
0
0
30
V
Venustech
venustech.com.cn
 43
0
0
0
31
WatchGuard AuthPoint
watchguard.com
 58
0
0
0
32
Zyxel
zyxel.com
 61
0
0
0

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 257 shared Enterprise Firewalls prompts. The same prompts, same model, same iterations. So differences in scores reflect actual differences in AI visibility, not differences in measurement.

Overall AI Visibility Score
Geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM: (LBA × Authority × TOM)^(1/3). Geometric mean is used so that any single weak metric pulls the overall score down, rather than being masked by strength elsewhere.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 257 category prompts (e.g. "best SEO tools for agencies"). This makes brand-to-brand comparisons valid - everyone faces identical inputs. LBA prompts are per-brand because they ask brand-specific questions.
Latent Brand Association (LBA)
5 brand probes + 1 control prompt, each run 5 times in recall mode (no web search). LBA = quality × meta × stability × share × recognition × 100. Read the full LBA methodology →
LLM Authority
50 organic category prompts (discovery, comparison, problem and transactional intents), each run once in recall mode and once in retrieval mode. Score = frequency × log-decayed prominence × intent weight, then 50/50 averaged across the two modes. Read the full Authority methodology →
Top of Mind (TOM)
15 high-volume discovery prompts (sourced from Keywords Everywhere search-volume data), each run 5 times in pure recall mode (no web). Score = frequency × (0.5 + 0.5 × log-prominence), volume-weighted. Read the full TOM methodology →