Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 13 → 27 of 61
3 categories · RankedApache NiFi
31Judge labels
1First choices
7Negative labels
11 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in ETL for mid-market buyers
Rank 8 of 75 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 13% of its 15 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Apache NiFi →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business18 of 62
0%8 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market8 of 75
2%15 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise44 of 72
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
In etl · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named Apache NiFi 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ETL and ELT | Data platform | 2% | 8 of 75 | 13% | 15 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Telemetry pipelines | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 79 of 124 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by OpenTelemetry Collector at 37% | |
| Workflow orchestration | Data platform | 0% | 33 of 79 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Prefect at 21% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Apache NiFi held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · ETL · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 7 → 8 of 69
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 26 → 51 of 64
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ETL | 2% | 2% | =heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 7 → 8 of 75 |
| Orchestration | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 39 → 33 of 79 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated Apache NiFi across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated Apache NiFi across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct3 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative6 labelsNone
Budget-constrained14 labels1
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative7 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.
“Talend Open Studio or Apache NiFi are often recommended as they offer good functionality without licensing costs” Claude Haiku 4.5 · ETL · budget prompt · first choice
“Excellent for automating data flow between systems. It is highly flexible and powerful but has a steeper learning curve” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ETL · budget prompt · alternative
“Real‑time/event‑driven pipelines | Apache NiFi (free) | Easy web UI, built‑in monitoring” MiniMax M2.5 · ETL · budget prompt · alternative
“powerful open-source ETL tool ... but it does require significant setup and maintenance effort” Mistral Small · ETL · budget 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.
“Apache NiFi/Airflow great but complex deployment” Grok 4.20 · ETL · negative prompt · soft negative
“Can be complex to set up and maintain” GLM 4.7 FlashX · ETL · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Apache NiFi, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Apache NiFi was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Apache NiFi, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Apache NiFi was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 Apache NiFi. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 21 of the 31 answers that named Apache NiFi and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
hevodata.com13
kestra.io11
airbyte.com10
integrate.io10
sqream.com10
g2.com9
blog.coupler.io8
portable.io8
fivetran.com6
skyvia.com6
Ninety-one of the ninety-one domain citations in answers naming Apache NiFi came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
nifi.apache.org is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Apache NiFi takes 2% of first choices and Fivetran takes 40%.ShowHide
Search and answers
nifi.apache.org is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Apache NiFi takes 2% of first choices and Fivetran takes 40%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “etl tool”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “etl tools”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 2,900 a month (“apache nifi”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 129 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 3,411 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 131 · 54 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 2,174
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 8 of 75 in ETL
Segment leader
40%
Fivetran
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 31 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 21 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on nifi.apache.org
467
subdomains included
Content
5
counted in the table below
Documentation
4
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Report or ebook | 5 | undated |
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page nifi.apache.org exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Apache NiFi
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Apache NiFi; a claim can dispute any of them.
Apache Nifi 1
Follow Apache NiFi
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
Apache NiFi is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Apache NiFi is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- an easy to use, powerful, and reliable system to process and distribute data
- Not stated on the pages read
- Who it is for, price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What Apache NiFi's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: nifi.apache.org, nifi.apache.org/documentation/security. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Apache NiFi'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 Apache NiFi, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Apache NiFi by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Apache NiFi is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name Apache NiFi, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.