IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Azure Logic Apps · September 2026 Edition

Azure · 2 categories · Named, not ranked

Azure Logic Apps

15Judge labels

0First choices

6Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Azure Logic Apps was named 8 times in Orchestration and 1 other category, where Prefect led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business44 of 78

under the label threshold

Mid-market43 of 86

under the label threshold

Enterprise35 of 89

under the label threshold

In orchestration · 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 Azure Logic Apps 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
Workflow orchestration	Data platform	0%	43 of 86	33%	6	under 10 labels · led by Prefect at 24%
SOAR platforms	Security operations	0%	47 of 49	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by Tines at 47%

Movement

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative15 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.

“Azure‑centric business processes | Azure Logic Apps” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Orchestration · 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.

“Avoid using this as a standalone SOAR solution for mature operations; use it only for simple, ad-hoc triggers.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · SOAR · negative prompt · hard negative

“Generic SOAR Tools (e.g., those built on Logic Apps): Require more effort for security-specific patterns and may not be SOC-optimized.” Mistral Small · SOAR · negative prompt · soft negative

“Integrates well with the Microsoft ecosystem, but has limited AI and human-in-the-loop features.” Mistral Small · Orchestration · comparative prompt · soft negative

“Adopting these leads to deep vendor lock-in” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Orchestration · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Azure Logic Apps, over the 15 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Azure Logic Apps was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

AWS Step Functions9 of 150Not in the top three

Temporal7 of 151Not in the top three

Make7 of 150Not in the top three

Apache Airflow6 of 151Not in the top three

n8n6 of 151Not in the top three

Camunda6 of 150Not in the top three

Microsoft Power Automate6 of 150Not in the top three

Splunk SOAR6 of 150Not in the top three

Zapier6 of 150Not in the top three

Workato5 of 151Not 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 Logic Apps. 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 11 of the 15 answers that named Azure Logic Apps and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

elementum.ai5

swimlane.com5

comparisec.com4

primedefence.io4

zapier.com4

enate.io3

reddit.com3

simbian.ai3

teamwork.com3

worldmetrics.org3

Thirty-seven of the thirty-seven domain citations in answers naming Azure Logic Apps came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

elementum.ai/blog/best-workflow-orchestration-tools5

comparisec.com/blog/best-soar-platforms-20264

primedefence.io/en/blog/soar-platforms-20264

zapier.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools4

enate.io/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools3

swimlane.com/blog/hazards-to-avoid-when-implementing-soar3

teamwork.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools3

worldmetrics.org/best/workflow-orchestration-software3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Azure Logic Apps

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

Logic Apps 2Azure Logic Apps / Microsoft Power Automate 1Microsoft Azure Logic Apps 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 Azure Logic Apps'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 Logic Apps, 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.