Small businessnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 15 of 39, unchanged
CodePipeline
4Judge labels
0First choices
0Negative labels
3 / 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.
Standing
1 label, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. CodePipeline was named 1 time in CI/CD, where GitHub Actions led with 68%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business17 of 41
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market21 of 43
0%1 label
under the label threshold
Enterprise25 of 47
0%1 label
under the label threshold
In ci/cd · 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 CodePipeline 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CI/CD platforms | Developer platform | 0% | 21 of 43 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by GitHub Actions at 68% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, CodePipeline held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · CI/CD · by segment
Mid-marketnewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 19 of 39, unchanged
EnterprisenewNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 23 of 43, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CI/CD | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 21 of 43, 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 CodePipeline 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 CodePipeline 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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
Direct1 labelNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative0 labelsNone
Budget-constrained0 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.
“AWS CodeBuild / CodePipeline” GLM 4.7 FlashX · CI/CD · 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.
No model argued against it.
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CodePipeline, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CodePipeline was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CodePipeline, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CodePipeline 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 CodePipeline. 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 4 of the 4 answers that named CodePipeline and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
blog.jetbrains.com3
cloud.folio3.com3
jelvix.com2
learn.g2.com2
about.gitlab.com1
alibabacloud.com1
aloa.co1
atlassian.com1
augmentcode.com1
blog.railway.com1
No domain is on file for CodePipeline, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Names read as CodePipeline
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as CodePipeline; a claim can dispute any of them.
AWS CodeBuild / CodePipeline 1
Follow CodePipeline
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 CodePipeline'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 CodePipeline, 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 CodePipeline by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where CodePipeline 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 CodePipeline, 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.