GitHub Packages
125Judge labels
24First choices
26Negative labels
12 / 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
33% in Artifact registries for small business buyers
Rank 8 of 89 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 24% of its 42 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of GitHub Packages →By buyer segmentA small-business product: leader at small business, not named at enterprise.
Small business1 of 86
33%60 labels
endorsed leader
Mid-market8 of 89
5%42 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise66 of 77
0%23 labels
criticized challenger
In artifact registries · 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 GitHub Packages 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Artifact and container registries | Developer platform | 5% | 8 of 89 | 24% | 42 | accepted challenger |
Movement
This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for GitHub Packages 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 GitHub Packages 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 GitHub Packages 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 4 |
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
Direct19 labels8
Paraphrase14 labels8
Comparative27 labels9not counted in share
Budget-constrained23 labels6
Scale-constrained18 labels2
Negative24 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative125 labels in all, every segment counted; 24 of the 35 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 most small to medium companies, GitHub Packages is often the best choice if you're already using GitHub” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Artifact registries · budget prompt · first choice
“The Best "All-in-One" Option: GitHub Packages / GitLab Package Registry” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Artifact registries · budget prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: GitHub Packages” Kimi K2 · Artifact registries · direct prompt · first choice
“Free private storage/bandwidth for GitHub users. Great if your code/CI is there—simple, secure, OCI-compliant. Limits: Tied to GitHub ecosystem.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Artifact registries · paraphrase 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.
“avoid direct, unrestricted use of public community images from Docker Hub, GitHub Container Registry, npm/PyPI, Artifact Hub” Muse Glimmer 30B · Artifact registries · negative prompt · hard negative
“GitHub Packages does not natively support PyPI (Python). If your team writes a significant amount of Python, GitHub Packages will not be a complete solution.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Artifact registries · direct prompt · soft negative
“Cons: Often less mature in terms of advanced proxying, virtual repositories, and advanced binary management compared to dedicated tools.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Artifact registries · scale prompt · soft negative
“Be cautious with public registries like Docker Hub, Quay.io, and GitHub Container Registry (for public images)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Artifact registries · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as GitHub Packages, over the 120 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitHub Packages was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as GitHub Packages, over the 120 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitHub Packages 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 GitHub Packages. 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 104 of the 120 answers that named GitHub Packages and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
harness.io44
cloudrepo.io41
jfrog.com40
sonatype.com35
itechguides.com32
thectoclub.com28
blog.railway.com27
ciopages.com27
gitnux.org27
safeguard.sh27
328 of the 328 domain citations in answers naming GitHub Packages came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where GitHub Packages stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where GitHub Packages stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,000 a month (“github packages”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 129 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on GitHub's site (github.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
5%
rank 8 of 89 in artifact registries
Segment leader
14%
JFrog Artifactory
- First choices
- 24 across its categories
- Named in
- 120 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 104 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.
Names read as GitHub Packages
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as GitHub Packages; a claim can dispute any of them.
GitHub Container Registry (GHCR) 8GitHub Container Registry (ghcr.io) 5GitHub Container Registry 2GitHub Container Registry (`ghcr.io`) 1GitHub Container Registry / GitHub Packages 1GitHub Container Registry, ghcr.io 1GitHub Packages (including GHCR) 1GitHub Packages / GitHub Container Registry 1
Follow GitHub Packages
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
GitHub is the company behind GitHub Packages.ShowHide
The company
GitHub is the company behind GitHub Packages.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIs 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 GitHub Packages'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 GitHub Packages, 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 GitHub Packages by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where GitHub Packages 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 GitHub Packages, 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.