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 24 → 19 of 20
AWS · 1 category · RankedAWS CodeCommit
44Judge labels
0First choices
23Negative labels
14 / 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
0% in Source control for mid-market buyers
Rank 19 of 33 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 40% of its 15 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of AWS CodeCommit →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business22 of 22
0%15 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market19 of 33
0%15 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise34 of 42
0%14 labels
criticized challenger
In source control · 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 AWS CodeCommit 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source control hosting | Developer platform | 0% | 19 of 33 | 40% | 15 | criticized challenger | =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, AWS CodeCommit held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Source control · by segment
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 16 → 18 of 29
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 → 34 of 36
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source control | 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 16 → 19 of 33 |
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 AWS CodeCommit 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 AWS CodeCommit 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 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 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
Direct5 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative12 labelsNone
Budget-constrained2 labelsNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative20 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative44 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.
“Other options to consider are GitHub, AWS CodeCommit, and other self-hosted solutions.” Llama 4 Maverick · Source control · budget prompt · alternative
“CodeCommit is a bare-bones Git hosting platform... unmatched for native AWS security” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Source control · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best low-cost paid option: AWS CodeCommit” Perplexity Sonar · Source control · 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.
“the service has a checkered past and may not be ideal for long-term projects given the uncertainty” MiniMax M2.5 · Source control · negative prompt · hard negative
“AWS CodeCommit is closed to new customers ... (not recommended for new projects)” Kimi K2 · Source control · comparative prompt · hard negative
“I wouldn't avoid it just because of the old announcement—but I would keep a portable backup, as with any host.” GPT-6 Luna · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative
“AWS/Azure | CAUTION | Heavy vendor lock-in restricts future flexibility.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AWS CodeCommit, over the 44 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AWS CodeCommit was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AWS CodeCommit, over the 44 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AWS CodeCommit 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 AWS CodeCommit. 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 44 of the 44 answers that named AWS CodeCommit and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com24
aws.amazon.comYour site17
guideflow.com17
it-ai-index.com16
gitnux.org14
us.fitgap.com14
note.com11
bitbucket.org10
guptadeepak.com10
sourceforge.net10
126 of the 143 domain citations in answers naming AWS CodeCommit came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where AWS CodeCommit stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where AWS CodeCommit stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,300 a month (“aws codecommit”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 37 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on AWS's site (aws.amazon.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 19 of 33 in source control
Segment leader
70%
GitHub
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 44 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 44 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.
Follow AWS CodeCommit
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
AWS is the company behind AWS CodeCommit.ShowHide
The company
AWS is the company behind AWS CodeCommit.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from AWS
- AWS ACM, AWS ACM Private CA, AWS ALB, AWS ALB/ELB, AWS ALB/NLB, AWS API Gateway HTTP APIs, AWS Amazon Aurora, AWS App Runner and 87 more
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Git repository hosting service
- For
- teams
- Price stated
- AWS CodeCommit costs $1 per active user per month. For every active user, your account receives an additional allowance of 10 GB-month of storage and 2,000 Git requests for that month. If you need more storage or Git requests for your users, additional usage will be charged at $0.06 per GB-month and $0.001 per Git request. aws.amazon.com/codecommit/faqs
- Starting price
- 1 aws.amazon.com/codecommit/faqs
- Free plan or trial
- Get started for free; AWS Free Tier offer for CodeCommit is available indefinitely to both new and existing AWS customers aws.amazon.com/codecommit/pricing
- Hosting
- each AWS region
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, certifications, customers
What AWS CodeCommit's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: aws.amazon.com/codecommit, aws.amazon.com/codecommit/sla, aws.amazon.com/codecommit/faqs, aws.amazon.com/codecommit/pricing, aws.amazon.com/codecommit/features. 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 AWS CodeCommit'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 AWS CodeCommit, 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 AWS CodeCommit by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where AWS CodeCommit 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 AWS CodeCommit, 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.