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 35 → 25 of 39
AWS · 1 category · RankedAWS CodePipeline
24Judge labels
0First choices
7Negative labels
11 / 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 CI/CD for enterprise buyers
Rank 12 of 43 in the mid-market standing
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 22% of its 9 labels there were negative.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business26 of 41
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market12 of 43
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise15 of 47
0%11 labels
criticized challenger
In ci/cd · 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 CodePipeline 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CI/CD platforms | Developer platform | 0% | 12 of 43 | 22% | 9 | 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, AWS CodePipeline held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · CI/CD · 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 34 → 12 of 39
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 15 → 14 of 43
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 34 → 12 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 AWS CodePipeline 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 CodePipeline 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 | 2 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 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
Direct3 labelsNone
Paraphrase2 labelsNone
Comparative10 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained2 labelsNone
Negative6 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative24 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.
“Seamless AWS integration (CodeBuild/Deploy), IAM controls, pay-per-use” Grok 4.20 · CI/CD · comparative prompt · alternative
“If you're AWS-heavy → AWS CodePipeline (native integration)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · CI/CD · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“Use AWS CodePipeline if your entire infrastructure is on AWS.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · CI/CD · comparative prompt · alternative
“For AWS shops: AWS CodePipeline/CodeBuild.” Mistral Small · CI/CD · 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.
“Caution; only use if your entire architecture is strictly restricted to one cloud provider.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CI/CD · negative prompt · soft negative
“tightly coupled with AWS services ... but is rarely used for complex testing suites” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CI/CD · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AWS CodePipeline, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AWS CodePipeline was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AWS CodePipeline, over the 24 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AWS CodePipeline 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 CodePipeline. 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 24 answers that named AWS CodePipeline and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
atlassian.com10
harness.io10
blog.jetbrains.com8
augmentcode.com6
cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com6
northflank.com6
octopus.com6
cloud.folio3.com5
dev.to5
drizz.dev5
Sixty-seven of the sixty-seven domain citations in answers naming AWS CodePipeline came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where AWS CodePipeline stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where AWS CodePipeline 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 codepipeline”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 84 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 12 of 43 in CI/CD
Segment leader
68%
GitHub Actions
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 24 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.
Names read as AWS CodePipeline
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as AWS CodePipeline; a claim can dispute any of them.
AWS CodePipeline & CodeBuild 1AWS CodePipeline + CodeBuild 1
Follow AWS CodePipeline
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 CodePipeline.ShowHide
The company
AWS is the company behind AWS CodePipeline.
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
- Automate continuous delivery pipelines for fast and reliable updates
- For
- each account using AWS CodePipeline
- Price stated
- Service Credits are calculated as a percentage of the charges paid by you for AWS CodePipeline for the monthly billing cycle aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/sla
- Starting price
- 1.00 aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Get started for free aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/pricing
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What AWS CodePipeline's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: aws.amazon.com/codepipeline, aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/sla, aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/faqs, aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/pricing, aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/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 CodePipeline'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 CodePipeline, 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 CodePipeline by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where AWS CodePipeline 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 CodePipeline, 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.