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 44 → 27 of 81
Azure Logic Apps
13Judge labels
1First choices
2Negative labels
7 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
4 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 4 times in Orchestration and 1 other category, where Prefect led with 21%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business29 of 86
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market57 of 79
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise12 of 108
2%4 labels
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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Workflow orchestration | Data platform | 0% | 57 of 79 | 33% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Prefect at 21% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| SOAR platforms | Security operations | 0% | 26 of 67 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Tines at 41% | =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, Azure Logic Apps held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Orchestration · 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 41 → 53 of 72
Enterprise▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 35 → 13 of 103
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Orchestration | 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 41 → 57 of 79 |
| SOAR | 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 43 → 26 of 67 |
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 Azure Logic Apps 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 Azure Logic Apps 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 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
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative2 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 label1
Scale-constrained4 labelsNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative13 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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 you use a modern SIEM or XDR (like Microsoft Sentinel/Logic Apps, CrowdStrike, or Palo Alto Cortex), they often have built-in automation capabilities.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SOAR · scale 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.
“Similar lock-in concerns; better for simple integrations than complex data pipelines” Kimi K2 · Orchestration · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Azure Logic Apps, over the 13 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.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Azure Logic Apps, over the 13 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.
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 Azure Logic Apps. 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 8 of the 13 answers that named Azure Logic Apps and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
airflow.apache.org3
g2.com3
kanerika.com3
kestra.io3
bmc.com2
it-ai-index.com2
larksuite.com2
learn.microsoft.com2
ones.com2
reddit.com2
No domain is on file for Azure Logic Apps, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
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.
Azure Logic Apps / Power Automate 1Microsoft Sentinel/Logic Apps 1
Follow Azure Logic Apps
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
Azure is the company behind Azure Logic Apps.ShowHide
The company
Azure is the company behind Azure Logic Apps.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Azure
- Azure ACR, Azure AD Conditional Access, Azure AD Graph API, Azure AI Document Intelligence, Azure AI Foundry, Azure AI Gateway, Azure AI Search, Azure API Management and 79 more
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.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Azure Logic Apps by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Azure Logic Apps 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 Azure Logic Apps, 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.