Every category where a model named Amazon Redshift 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
Data warehouses	Data platform	0%	7 of 41	24%	62	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Amazon Redshift yet. 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 Amazon Redshift across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	2	2	1	5
GPT-5.4 mini	4	1	1	6
Gemini 3.5 Flash	2	1	3	6
Perplexity Sonar	2	1	1	4
Grok 4.1 Fast	5	0	1	6
Mistral Small	1	2	1	4
DeepSeek V4 Flash	2	1	3	6
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	4	0	1	5
Kimi K2	6	0	1	7
GLM 4.7 FlashX	4	0	1	5
MiniMax M2.5	3	2	1	6

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

Direct33 labels1

Paraphrase31 labels1

Comparative36 labelsNone

Budget-constrained30 labels5

Scale-constrained27 labels1

Negative34 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative191 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 8 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.

“Offers a free tier for 2 months on DC2.large nodes, and their RA3 nodes with managed storage can be cost-effective for variable workloads.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Data warehouses · budget prompt · alternative

“If your company is already heavily invested in the AWS ecosystem, Redshift is a strong alternative, though it can be more expensive” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Data warehouses · budget prompt · alternative

“Already deep in the AWS ecosystem... More operational overhead (maintenance, resizing clusters); concurrency can be a bottleneck” MiniMax M2.5 · Data warehouses · direct prompt · alternative

“Deep AWS shop with predictable workloads | Amazon Redshift | Cost-effective if you can commit to reserved capacity” Kimi K2 · Data warehouses · paraphrase 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.

“provisioning (always-on) solutions like Redshift can quietly rack up bills when idle” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Data warehouses · budget prompt · hard negative

“provisioned Redshift is highly likely to become a slow, expensive bottleneck” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Data warehouses · negative prompt · hard negative

“Skip Redshift for new projects (particularly AI-heavy ones)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Data warehouses · negative prompt · hard negative

“Many traditional data warehouses (like Snowflake or Amazon Redshift) are built on a "scale-out" architecture designed for petabyte-scale enterprises.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Data warehouses · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Amazon Redshift, over the 188 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Amazon Redshift was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Google BigQuery188 of 18867Not in the top three

Snowflake184 of 18869Not in the top three

Databricks84 of 1883Not in the top three

Azure Synapse Analytics63 of 1880Not in the top three

ClickHouse Cloud50 of 1880Not in the top three

Microsoft Fabric38 of 1880Not in the top three

Databricks SQL30 of 1880Not in the top three

MotherDuck28 of 1888Not in the top three

Firebolt15 of 1880Not in the top three

PostgreSQL11 of 1881Not 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 Amazon Redshift. 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 148 of the 188 answers that named Amazon Redshift and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

clickhouse.com71

atlan.com64

fortegrp.com57

domo.com50

g2.com41

scnsoft.com40

blog.dataddo.com36

motherduck.com36

valiotti.com30

trustradius.com29

454 of the 454 domain citations in answers naming Amazon Redshift came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

atlan.com/best-cloud-data-warehouses62

clickhouse.com/resources/engineering/top-5-cloud-data-warehouses58

fortegrp.com/insights/best-cloud-data-warehouse57

domo.com/learn/article/best-data-warehouse-platforms49

blog.dataddo.com/best-cloud-data-warehouse-solutions-and-how-to-choose-the-right-one36

scnsoft.com/data/data-warehouse/cloud36

clickhouse.com/blog/cloud-data-warehouses-cost-performance-comparison35

g2.com/categories/data-warehouse/small-business32

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Amazon Redshift

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

Redshift 13Amazon Redshift Serverless 3AWS Redshift Serverless 2AWS Redshift 1Amazon Redshift (Provisioned Clusters) 1Redshift (AWS) 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 Amazon Redshift'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 Amazon Redshift, 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 aws.amazon.com 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.