Every category where a model named AWS Glue 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
ETL and ELT	Data platform	0%	14 of 66	17%	18	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for AWS Glue 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 AWS Glue 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	1	1	1	3
GPT-5.4 mini	2	0	0	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	1	0	3
Kimi K2	0	2	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative17 labelsNone

Budget-constrained7 labelsNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative52 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.

“Already in the cloud (AWS, Azure, GCP) | AWS Glue, Azure Data Factory, or Google Cloud Dataflow” MiniMax M2.5 · ETL · budget prompt · alternative

“Azure Data Factory/AWS Glue if you're already committed to that cloud provider” Claude Haiku 4.5 · ETL · direct prompt · alternative

“Best for teams already in AWS that want Spark-based, serverless data processing.” Perplexity Sonar · ETL · comparative prompt · alternative

“a cloud-native option like AWS Glue or a warehouse-centric stack may be enough” GPT-5.4 mini · ETL · direct 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.

“these visual transformation steps spin up massive Apache Spark clusters. They are highly resource-intensive and extremely expensive” Gemini 3.5 Flash · ETL · negative prompt · soft negative

“Glue retries only when the Spark job itself fails, ignoring data errors... Glue Workflows lack built-in dependency tracking” Claude Haiku 4.5 · ETL · negative prompt · soft negative

“Popular but carries genuine cost and usability traps” DeepSeek V4 Flash · ETL · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AWS Glue, over the 52 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AWS Glue was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Fivetran44 of 5215Not in the top three

Airbyte38 of 529Not in the top three

Talend34 of 522Not in the top three

Azure Data Factory33 of 520Not in the top three

Matillion25 of 521Not in the top three

dbt23 of 522Not in the top three

Stitch22 of 521Not in the top three

Apache Airflow20 of 521Not in the top three

Hevo Data18 of 522Not in the top three

Informatica16 of 521Not 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 AWS Glue. 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 37 of the 52 answers that named AWS Glue and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

integrate.io31

hevodata.com25

fivetran.com19

airbyte.com17

estuary.dev16

stacksync.com16

sqream.com14

domo.com12

g2.com12

weld.app10

172 of the 172 domain citations in answers naming AWS Glue came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

integrate.io/blog/top-7-etl-tools21

stacksync.com/blog/26-best-etl-tools-2025-curated-list16

estuary.dev/blog/etl-tools-list14

fivetran.com/learn/etl-tools14

sqream.com/blog/best-etl-tools14

hevodata.com/learn/etl-tools-for-enterprise-data-integration13

dataquest.io/blog/etl-tools-practical-guide-with-examples9

domo.com/learn/article/etl-tools9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as AWS Glue

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

AWS Glue Visual Editor 1

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 Glue'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 Glue, 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 aws.amazon.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.