Index › Products › Evidently AI · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Evidently AI

2Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

2 / 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Evidently AI was named 2 times in AI governance, where Credo AI led with 18%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market120 of 135

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In ai governance · 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 Evidently AI 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
AI governance platforms	Data platform	0%	120 of 135	50%	2	under 10 labels · led by Credo AI at 18%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Evidently AI yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Evidently AI across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
Kimi K2	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 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.

“Evidently AI - Open source model monitoring” Kimi K2 · AI governance · budget 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.

“Not a complete governance platform — lacks policy management and audit workflows” DeepSeek V4 Flash · AI governance · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Evidently AI, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Evidently AI was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Credo AI2 of 20Not among the top eight

Holistic AI2 of 20Not among the top eight

IBM watsonx.governance2 of 20Not among the top eight

Langfuse2 of 20Not among the top eight

OneTrust AI Governance2 of 20Not among the top eight

PrivacyForge1 of 21Not among the top eight

VerifyWise1 of 21Not among the top eight

Fiddler AI1 of 20Not among the top eight

LiteLLM1 of 20Not among the top eight

MLflow1 of 20Not among the top eight

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 Evidently AI. 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 2 of the 2 answers that named Evidently AI and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

aiopsschool.com2

github.com2

prompts.ai2

sourceforge.net2

aibusinessweekly.net1

aicompliancevendors.com1

aipromptshub.co1

aitoolsatlas.ai1

applytosupply.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk1

assets.applytosupply.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk1

No domain is on file for Evidently AI, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

aiopsschool.com/blog/top-10-ai-governance-platforms-features-pros-cons-comparison2

github.com/aglio-lab/ai-governance-tools2

prompts.ai/blog/affordable-ai-compliance-tools-small-businesses.html2

sourceforge.net/software/ai-governance/free-version2

aibusinessweekly.net/p/ai-governance-framework1

aicompliancevendors.com/guides/ai-governance-tools-for-startups1

aipromptshub.co/safety/responsible-ai-platforms-enterprise1

aitoolsatlas.ai/tools/credo-ai1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Evidently AI

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 Evidently AI'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 Evidently AI, 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 Evidently AI by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Evidently AI 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 Evidently AI, 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.