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 10 → 8 of 20
1 category · RankedCodeberg
20Judge labels
0First choices
4Negative labels
13 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
0% in Source control for mid-market buyers
Rank 8 of 33 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 9% of its 11 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Codeberg →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business8 of 22
0%7 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market8 of 33
0%11 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise35 of 42
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
In source control · 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 Codeberg 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source control hosting | Developer platform | 0% | 8 of 33 | 9% | 11 | accepted challenger | =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, Codeberg held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Source control · 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 6 → 8 of 29
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 21 → 28 of 36
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source control | 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 6 → 8 of 33 |
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 Codeberg 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 Codeberg 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 | 1 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 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
Direct0 labelsNone
Paraphrase0 labelsNone
Comparative3 labelsNone
Budget-constrained3 labelsNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative14 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative20 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 2 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.
“For Open Source & Privacy: Codeberg. It is a non-profit, ad-free, and open-source hosting platform” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Source control · negative prompt · first choice
“Prioritize self-hosted/open options like Forgejo, Gitea, or Codeberg for privacy” Grok 4.20 · Source control · negative prompt · first choice
“self-hostable, open-source forges with clear jurisdiction and no ML-training claims, e.g. Forgejo/Gitea/Codeberg/SourceHut, are frequently recommended” Muse Glimmer 30B · Source control · negative prompt · alternative
“Codeberg: An independent, non-profit instance running on Forgejo/Gitea infrastructure.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Source control · negative 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.
“Codeberg's guidance does not position it as general-purpose private commercial hosting” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Codeberg, over the 20 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Codeberg was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Codeberg, over the 20 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Codeberg 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 Codeberg. 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 19 of the 20 answers that named Codeberg and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com9
note.com9
opensourcereviews.github.io9
guptadeepak.com8
guideflow.com7
it-ai-index.com7
about.gitlab.com5
gitnux.org5
us.fitgap.com5
aiproductivity.ai4
Sixty-eight of the sixty-eight domain citations in answers naming Codeberg came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
codeberg.org is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Codeberg takes 0% of first choices and GitHub takes 70%.ShowHide
Search and answers
codeberg.org is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Codeberg takes 0% of first choices and GitHub takes 70%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “source control hosting platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “source control hosting platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 8,100 a month (“codeberg”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 33 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 32,214 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 7,203 · 291 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 40,965
- 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 8 of 33 in source control
Segment leader
70%
GitHub
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 20 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 19 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 codeberg.org
22
subdomains included
Content
15
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conference or event | 7 | undated | |||
| Blog | 6 | 1 | 2026-07-23 | ||
| Comparison | 1 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-07-23Protecting our floss commons from llms blog
- 2022-11-13Index3 blog
- 2022-01-22Index4 blog
- 2020-02-27Index7 blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page codeberg.org 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. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Follow Codeberg
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
Codeberg is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Codeberg is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- a non-profit, community-led organization that aims to help free and open source projects prosper by giving them a safe and friendly home
- For
- free and open-source projects
- Price stated
- We don't charge users money codeberg.org
- Free plan or trial
- These are fully optional codeberg.org
- Hosting
- Europe
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, certifications, customers
What Codeberg's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: codeberg.org. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Codeberg'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 Codeberg, 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 Codeberg by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Codeberg 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 Codeberg, 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.