Small business▲+6Since September 2026: 2% → 8%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
8%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 6 of 51, unchanged
1 category · RankedApidog
19Judge labels
6First choices
1Negative labels
10 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
7% in API management for small business buyers
Rank 9 of 61 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 0% of its 4 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business6 of 58
7%15 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market9 of 61
3%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In api management · 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 Apidog 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| API management | Developer platform | 3% | 9 of 61 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Kong Gateway at 37% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Apidog held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · API management · by segment
Mid-market▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
4%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 22 → 8 of 50
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| API management | 0% | 4% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 0% → 4%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 22 → 9 of 61 |
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 Apidog 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 Apidog 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 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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
Direct6 labels2
Paraphrase4 labelsNone
Comparative3 labels2not counted in share
Budget-constrained6 labels4
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative0 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative19 labels in all, every segment counted; 6 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.
“The best API management platform for a company with a limited budget is Apidog, which is a lower-cost, all-in-one alternative to Postman.” Llama 4 Maverick · API management · budget prompt · first choice
“if you need the most budget-friendly option, Apidog may be the better choice due to its lower starting price and free tier” Mistral Small · API management · budget prompt · first choice
“### 4. Best Modern Alternative: Apidog” Qwen 3.7 Flash · API management · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“For all-in-one at minimal cost: Apidog” Claude Haiku 4.5 · API management · 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Apidog, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Apidog was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Apidog, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Apidog 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 Apidog. 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 19 of the 19 answers that named Apidog and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
astera.com17
g2.com11
integrate.io11
zuplo.com9
us.fitgap.com8
mojoauth.com7
softwaresuggest.com7
spotsaas.com7
getapp.com6
itechguides.com6
Eighty-nine of the eighty-nine domain citations in answers naming Apidog came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
apidog.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Apidog takes 3% of first choices and Kong Gateway takes 37%.ShowHide
Search and answers
apidog.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Apidog takes 3% of first choices and Kong Gateway takes 37%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “api management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “api management platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,000 a month (“apidog”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 3 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 52,211 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 20,618 · 112 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 6,234
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
3%
rank 9 of 61 in API management
Segment leader
37%
Kong Gateway
- First choices
- 6 across its categories
- Named in
- 19 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 19 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 apidog.com
13,041
subdomains included
Content
5,420
counted in the table below
Documentation
681
Product · Integration
15 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 4,345 | 0 | 2026-04-01 | API management, API gateways | |
| Comparison | 695 | 0 | 2024-07-23 | API gateways, API management | |
| Glossary or explainer | 362 | 0 | 2024-08-02 | API gateways, AI coding | |
| Report or ebook | 9 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 5 | undated | |||
| Case study | 3 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-04-01Api documentation maker tools blog
- 2025-09-21How secure is claude code when processing proprietary code blog
- 2024-08-20How to fix 401 unauthorized error blog
- 2024-08-16How to fix status code 407 blog
- 2024-08-09Api code status blog
- 2024-08-05Walmart api how to use walmart api blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page apidog.com 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.
Follow Apidog
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
Apidog is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Apidog is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- REAL API Design-first Development Platform. Design. Debug. Test. Document. Mock. Build APIs Faster & Together.
- For
- teams
- Price stated
- FOR TEAMS Free collaboration for up to 4 members! apidog.com
- Starting price
- 0 apidog.com/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Free collaboration for up to 4 members! apidog.com
- Integrations claimed
- 15 apidog.com
- Certifications
- SOC 2ISO 27001GDPRSOC 2 Type 2ISO 27001:2022
- Hosting
- Europe Hosting Option
- Not stated on the pages read
- Customers
What Apidog's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: apidog.com, apidog.com/pricing, trust.apidog.com, apidog.com/solutions/api-collaboration, apidog.com/customer-stories. 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 Apidog'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 Apidog, 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 Apidog by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Apidog 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 Apidog, 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.