Every category where a model named Argo Workflows 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
Workflow orchestration	Data platform	0%	15 of 79	14%	22	accepted challenger	=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
CI/CD platforms	Developer platform	0%	20 of 43	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by GitHub Actions at 68%	=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, Argo Workflows held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.

Best category · Orchestration · by segment

Small business▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.

2%from 0% in September 2026

Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 73 → 11 of 81

Mid-market=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 15 of 72, unchanged

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 25 → 17 of 103

All categories · Mid-market

Category	September 2026	Now	Change	Reading	Rank
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 15 of 79, unchanged
CI/CD	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 25 → 20 of 43

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 Argo Workflows across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	1	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	2	1	0	3
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	1	1	3
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.20	1	1	1	3
Mistral Small	1	1	0	2
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	2	1	1	4
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	0	2
GPT-6 Luna	1	0	0	1
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	1	0	1

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative22 labelsNone

Budget-constrained10 labels1

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative16 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative54 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.

“Everything is on Kubernetes and you want container-level orchestration? → Argo Workflows” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Orchestration · comparative prompt · alternative

“Argo Workflows is free (open source) and best for teams already running Kubernetes” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Orchestration · budget prompt · alternative

“Choose Argo if your workload is containerized and Kubernetes-native.” GPT-5.4 mini · Orchestration · comparative prompt · alternative

“for Kubernetes-native workloads, Argo Workflows is a leading option” Perplexity Sonar · Orchestration · comparative 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.

“Only use Argo Workflows if your entire stack is already native to Kubernetes.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Orchestration · negative prompt · soft negative

“Argo Workflows | Non-Kubernetes environment; team lacks K8s expertise” Kimi K2 · Orchestration · negative prompt · soft negative

“assumes deep K8s knowledge; debugging failures can be opaque” Grok 4.20 · Orchestration · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Argo Workflows, over the 54 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Argo Workflows was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Apache Airflow52 of 5418Not among the top eight

Prefect47 of 545Not among the top eight

Dagster43 of 542Not among the top eight

Temporal34 of 544Not among the top eight

Camunda28 of 540Not among the top eight

n8n20 of 544Not among the top eight

Zapier18 of 544Not among the top eight

Kestra17 of 541Not among the top eight

AWS Step Functions17 of 540Not among the top eight

Make13 of 544Not among the top eight

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 Argo Workflows. 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 49 of the 54 answers that named Argo Workflows and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

kestra.io25

pracdata.io19

getorchestra.io17

larksuite.com17

devopsschool.com15

thedigitalprojectmanager.com15

airflow.apache.org13

teamwork.com13

wrike.com13

zapier.com13

160 of the 160 domain citations in answers naming Argo Workflows came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

pracdata.io/p/state-of-workflow-orchestration-ecosystem-202519

kestra.io/resources/infrastructure/workflow-orchestration-tools18

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-workflow-orchestration-tools-features-pros-cons-comparison14

larksuite.com/en_us/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools14

teamwork.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools13

wrike.com/workflow-guide/workflow-orchestration-tools13

kanerika.com/blogs/workflow-orchestration-tools12

thedigitalprojectmanager.com/tools/workflow-orchestration-tools12

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

argoproj.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Argo Workflows takes 0% of first choices and Prefect takes 21%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “workflow orchestration tool”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “workflow orchestration tools”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 1,900 a month (“argo workflows”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 52 a month
Its company's site: argoproj.io shared with Argo's other products; the figures are the site's
Organic visits to its site: about 182 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 110 · 3 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 595
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 edition

Share of first choices

rank 15 of 79 in orchestration

Segment leader

21%

Prefect

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 54 answers
Its own site cited: in 49 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.

Names read as Argo Workflows

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

Argo 2

Follow Argo Workflows

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

Argo is the company behind Argo Workflows.

ShowHide

On record

Company records

Also from Argo: Argo CD

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 Argo Workflows'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 Argo Workflows, 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 Argo Workflows by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Argo Workflows 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 Argo Workflows, 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.