Every category where a model named Azure Data Factory 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%	13 of 66	0%	15	accepted challenger
Workflow orchestration	Data platform	0%	30 of 86	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Prefect at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Azure Data Factory 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 Azure Data Factory across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	1	2
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	1	1	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	2
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	2	0	2
Kimi K2	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	2	0	2

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

Paraphrase11 labelsNone

Comparative14 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative8 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative45 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.

“If your entire tech stack is Microsoft-based (M365, Azure SQL): Platform: Azure Data Factory (ADF)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · ETL · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Pay-as-you-go, serverless, no hardware to manage; free tier enough for pilot workloads.” 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 Azure and hybrid Microsoft environments with low-code data flows.” Perplexity Sonar · ETL · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Azure Data Factory, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Azure Data Factory was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Fivetran36 of 4514Not in the top three

AWS Glue33 of 450Not in the top three

Airbyte26 of 456Not in the top three

Talend24 of 452Not in the top three

dbt23 of 451Not in the top three

Apache Airflow22 of 453Not in the top three

Matillion20 of 451Not in the top three

Stitch15 of 450Not in the top three

Hevo Data14 of 452Not in the top three

IBM DataStage14 of 450Not 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 Azure Data Factory. 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 34 of the 45 answers that named Azure Data Factory and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

integrate.io23

hevodata.com19

airbyte.com14

fivetran.com14

stacksync.com14

estuary.dev13

sqream.com12

domo.com11

weld.app10

skyvia.com8

138 of the 138 domain citations in answers naming Azure Data Factory came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

integrate.io/blog/top-7-etl-tools15

stacksync.com/blog/26-best-etl-tools-2025-curated-list13

estuary.dev/blog/etl-tools-list12

sqream.com/blog/best-etl-tools12

hevodata.com/learn/etl-tools-for-enterprise-data-integration11

fivetran.com/learn/etl-tools10

datacamp.com/blog/a-list-of-the-16-best-etl-tools-and-why-to-choose-them7

domo.com/learn/article/etl-tools7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Azure Data Factory

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

Azure Data Factory (ADF) 3

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 Azure Data Factory'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 Azure Data Factory, 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 azure.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.