IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › AutoMQ · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

AutoMQ

9Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. AutoMQ was named 6 times in Streaming, where Confluent Cloud led with 32%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business28 of 88

under the label threshold

Mid-market22 of 78

under the label threshold

Enterprise35 of 47

under the label threshold

In streaming · 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 AutoMQ 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
Streaming platforms	Data platform	0%	22 of 78	33%	6	under 10 labels · led by Confluent Cloud at 32%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for AutoMQ 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 AutoMQ 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	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“AutoMQ (Best for Self-Hosted Scale) ... cut your storage and replication bills by up to 80%” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Streaming · budget prompt · alternative

“look for managed alternatives like Aiven, AutoMQ, or Redpanda” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Streaming · negative prompt · alternative

“AutoMQ if you want a simpler, cloud‑first experience” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Streaming · 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.

“Kafka-compatible "drop-in" replacements (e.g., Redpanda, WarpStream, AutoMQ)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Streaming · negative prompt · soft negative

“it may have a newer ecosystem compared to Confluent and AWS-native services” Llama 4 Maverick · Streaming · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AutoMQ, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AutoMQ was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Apache Kafka9 of 92Not in the top three

Redpanda9 of 92Not in the top three

Apache Pulsar7 of 91Not in the top three

Confluent Cloud7 of 91Not in the top three

WarpStream6 of 91Not in the top three

Amazon Kinesis Data Streams6 of 90Not in the top three

Azure Event Hubs6 of 90Not in the top three

Google Cloud Pub/Sub6 of 90Not in the top three

Amazon MSK5 of 91Not in the top three

RabbitMQ4 of 90Not 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 AutoMQ. 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 8 of the 9 answers that named AutoMQ and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

automq.comYour site7

confluent.io4

cotocus.com4

guideflow.com4

bestdevops.com3

blobstreaming.org3

devopsschool.com3

gartner.com3

kai-waehner.de3

tinybird.co3

Thirty of the thirty-seven domain citations in answers naming AutoMQ came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

automq.com/blog/top-10-event-streaming-platforms-confluent-msk-redpanda-alternatives4

cotocus.com/blog/top-10-event-streaming-platforms-features-pros-cons-comparison4

guideflow.com/blog/event-streaming-software4

blobstreaming.org/notes/event-streaming-platforms-20263

gartner.com/reviews/market/event-stream-processing3

automq.com/blog/confluent-vs-redpanda-what-kafka-teams-should-compare-before-switching2

bestdevops.com/top-10-event-streaming-platforms-features-pros-cons-comparison2

bestdevops.com/top-10-event-streaming-platforms-tools-in-2025-features-pros-cons-compariso2

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 AutoMQ'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 AutoMQ, 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 automq.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.