Artifact and container registries · October 2026 Edition
Cloudsmith vs GitHub Packages
Five of fourteen models named Cloudsmith first on the direct prompt; one named GitHub Packages. Cloudsmith was named by ten of the fourteen models and GitHub Packages by twelve and Cloudsmith carries 21 labels and GitHub Packages 42, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
GitHub Packages
accepted challengerNamed in one category this edition.
First-choice share8%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate10%24%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#7A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels2142A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Cloudsmith reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Sonatype Nexus Repository was named alongside these two in eight of the fourteen direct answers. JFrog Artifactory vs Cloudsmith · JFrog Artifactory vs GitHub Packages · Sonatype Nexus Repository vs Cloudsmith
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the artifact and container registries page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
CloudsmithFirst choices, of fourteen modelsGitHub PackagesDirect511 against GitHub Packages
Paraphrase00
Comparative00
Budget-constrained022 against Cloudsmith
Scale-constrained002 against GitHub Packages
Negative007 against GitHub Packages
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Cloudsmith and GitHub Packages were named in the same answer thirty-five times, of the 64 answers naming Cloudsmith and the 120 naming GitHub Packages. In those answers GitHub Packages took the first choice five times and Cloudsmith two.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Cloudsmith and GitHub Packages stood in it.
| Model | DirectGP | ParaphraseGP | ComparativeGP | Budget-constrainedGP | Scale-constrainedGP | NegativeGP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | GP | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | GP | GP | GP | GP | GP | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | |||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | GP | GP | GP | ||
| Mistral Small | | GP | GP | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | GP | | GP | GP | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | GP | GP | ||||
| Kimi K2 | GP | GP | GP | GP | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | GP | GP | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | GP | GP | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | | GP | GP | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | GP |
CloudsmithGP GitHub Packages first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Cloudsmith on the left and GitHub Packages on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Cloudsmith and GitHub Packages stood in it.
Cloudsmith first, GitHub Packages not the choice
5 of 14 modelsGitHub Packages was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Gemini 3.5 FlashCloudsmith alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, GitLab Package Registry, Google Artifact Registry, Sonatype Lifecycle
Grok 4.1 FastCloudsmith alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact
Mistral SmallCloudsmith alternatives: AWS, Google Cloud, Packagecloud
Llama 4 MaverickCloudsmith alternatives: Packagecloud
GPT-6 LunaCloudsmith alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, JFrog Artifactory, Sonatype Nexus Repository
GitHub Packages first, Cloudsmith not the choice
1 of 14 modelsCloudsmith was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Kimi K2GitHub Packages alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, Sonatype Nexus Repository
Neither was the first choice, one was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Perplexity SonarJFrog Artifactory alternatives: Cloudsmith, Sonatype Nexus Repository
DeepSeek V4 FlashSonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: Azure Artifacts, Cloudsmith
GLM 4.7 FlashXSonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: Cloudsmith, Harbor, JFrog Artifactory
MiniMax M2.5Sonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Cloudsmith, JFrog Artifactory
Muse Glimmer 30BSonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: CloudRepo, Cloudsmith, JFrog Artifactory
Neither was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
GPT-5.4 miniSonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, JFrog Artifactory
Qwen 3.7 FlashJFrog Artifactory alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, Sonatype Lifecycle
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
GitHub Packages leads by thirty points.
GitHub Packages33%#1 of 12
Cloudsmith3%#7 of 12Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Cloudsmith leads at mid-market.
Cloudsmith8%#4 of 16GitHub Packages5%#7 of 16
The full mid-market standing →Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Cloudsmith0%#9 of 13GitHub Packages0%#12 of 13
The full enterprise standing →What the models said about Cloudsmith
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Skip cloud-hosted options (like JFrog Cloud or Cloudsmith)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Cons: Can get expensive with high usage” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · soft negative
“Cloudsmith - a natural fit for engineering teams at scaling startups and mid-size companies that want enterprise-grade artifact management” Llama 4 Maverick · direct prompt · first choice
“Cloudsmith stands out as a particularly strong choice for engineering teams at scaling startups and mid-size companies” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
“Best Overall for SaaS & Multi-Language Stacks: Cloudsmith ... is the standout choice” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about GitHub Packages
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“avoid direct, unrestricted use of public community images from Docker Hub, GitHub Container Registry, npm/PyPI, Artifact Hub” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · hard negative
“GitHub Packages does not natively support PyPI (Python). If your team writes a significant amount of Python, GitHub Packages will not be a complete solution.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“Cons: Often less mature in terms of advanced proxying, virtual repositories, and advanced binary management compared to dedicated tools.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“For most small to medium companies, GitHub Packages is often the best choice if you're already using GitHub” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“The Best "All-in-One" Option: GitHub Packages / GitLab Package Registry” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: GitHub Packages” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
JFrog Artifactory vs CloudsmithJFrog Artifactory vs GitHub PackagesSonatype Nexus Repository vs CloudsmithSonatype Nexus Repository vs GitHub PackagesAmazon Elastic Container Registry vs CloudsmithAmazon Elastic Container Registry vs GitHub PackagesCloudsmith vs Amazon ECRCloudsmith vs Azure Container RegistryCloudsmith vs Sonatype LifecycleAmazon ECR vs GitHub PackagesAzure Container Registry vs GitHub PackagesGitHub Packages vs Sonatype LifecycleAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full artifact registries standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.