| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Managed DNS | Network and edge | 0% | 9 of 78 | 10% | 20 | accepted challenger |
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“consider their native DNS (Route 53, Azure DNS, Cloud DNS) to reduce cross-platform overhead—but weigh against lock-in” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Managed DNS · scale prompt · alternative
“Use a dedicated DNS provider (like Cloudflare, AWS Route53, or Azure DNS) to host your zones” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Managed DNS · negative prompt · alternative
“Choose Azure/Google DNS if you are deeply embedded in those specific ecosystems” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Managed DNS · comparative prompt · alternative
“Azure DNS is the logical choice for enterprises using Azure Active Directory” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Managed DNS · comparative prompt · alternative
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.
“AWS Route 53, Azure DNS, and Google Cloud DNS all locking you into their platform with no standard mechanism to replicate zones to external nameservers” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Managed DNS · negative prompt · soft negative
“Single-Provider Setups for High-Value Enterprises (Caution)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Managed DNS · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 46 of the 55 answers that named Azure DNS and are not a share of its labels.
No domain is on file for Azure DNS, so its own site is not marked.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.
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.
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 DNS'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 DNS, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Azure DNS by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: