Small business▲+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 34 → 13 of 78
2 categories · Named, not rankedCloudCheckr
11Judge labels
1First choices
1Negative labels
6 / 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. CloudCheckr was named 4 times in FinOps and 1 other category, where Vantage led with 45%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business15 of 83
2%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market28 of 76
0%3 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise28 of 73
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
In finops · 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 CloudCheckr 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud cost management | Cloud and infrastructure | 0% | 28 of 76 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Vantage at 45% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| IT financial management | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 104 of 159 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Nicus ITFM Platform at 9% |
Movement
Since September 2026, CloudCheckr held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · FinOps · 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 67 → 33 of 70
Enterprise=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 28 of 71, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FinOps | 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 67 → 28 of 76 |
| IT financial mgmt | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 104 of 159, unchanged |
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 CloudCheckr 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 CloudCheckr 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 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 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase2 labels1
Comparative4 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained3 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative11 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 need bundled cost + security/governance out of the box, CloudCheckr is the mid-market/enterprise popular option.” Muse Glimmer 30B · FinOps · 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CloudCheckr, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CloudCheckr was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CloudCheckr, over the 11 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CloudCheckr 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 CloudCheckr. 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 6 of the 11 answers that named CloudCheckr and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cloudaware.com3
cloudzero.com3
amnic.com2
cotocus.com2
docs.aws.amazon.com2
g2.com2
nops.io2
openmetal.io2
techvendorindex.com2
thectoclub.com2
Twenty-two of the twenty-two domain citations in answers naming CloudCheckr came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cloud.nl is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, CloudCheckr takes 0% of first choices and Vantage takes 45%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cloud.nl is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, CloudCheckr takes 0% of first choices and Vantage takes 45%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “cloud cost management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “cloud cost management platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Organic visits to its site
- about 3 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 8 · 0 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 235
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 28 of 76 in finops
Segment leader
45%
Vantage
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 11 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 6 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on cloud.nl
134
subdomains included
Content
6
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
10 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comparison | 3 | 0 | 2026-05-12 | ||
| Template or tool | 2 | 0 | 2026-03-26 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 1 | 0 | 2026-03-26 |
Most recent
- 2026-05-12Public ai vs private inference comparison
- 2026-03-26Managed hosting vs cloud en comparison
- 2026-03-26Hosting comparison checklist template or tool
- 2026-03-26What is an uptime guarantee glossary or explainer
- 2026-03-23Managed hosting vs cloud comparison
- 2026-03-23Hosting vergelijken checklist template or tool
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page cloud.nl exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow CloudCheckr
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.
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 CloudCheckr'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 CloudCheckr, 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 CloudCheckr by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where CloudCheckr 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 CloudCheckr, 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.