Every category where a model named GitHub 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
Source control hosting	Developer platform	74%	1 of 23	17%	72	endorsed leader
CI/CD platforms	Developer platform	2%	4 of 45	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by GitHub Actions at 65%

Movement

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

By model

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	4	0	0	1	5
GPT-5.4 mini	3	0	2	0	5
Gemini 3.5 Flash	5	0	0	1	6
Perplexity Sonar	3	2	0	1	6
Grok 4.1 Fast	4	1	0	1	6
Mistral Small	4	1	1	1	7
DeepSeek V4 Flash	4	1	0	1	6
Llama 4 Maverick	5	0	1	1	7
Qwen 3.7 Flash	4	0	1	1	6
Kimi K2	5	0	1	1	7
GLM 4.7 FlashX	3	0	1	2	6
MiniMax M2.5	4	0	1	1	6

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

Direct39 labels35

Paraphrase41 labels34

Comparative39 labels32not counted in share

Budget-constrained42 labels26

Scale-constrained39 labels11

Negative42 labels9not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative242 labels in all, every segment counted; 106 of the 147 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 the company is involved in open-source work, recruits from a broad engineering market, or wants a mature Actions ecosystem and Copilot AI integration, GitHub is a good choice.” Llama 4 Maverick · Source control · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“GitHub (Enterprise): The industry standard for DX, has the largest ecosystem, top-tier AI features (Copilot), and great talent familiarity. However, it can become very expensive” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Source control · scale prompt · first choice

“Go with GitHub Enterprise if your team values developer experience, a huge ecosystem, and scalability—it's the most adopted for mid-market B2B” Grok 4.1 Fast · Source control · direct prompt · first choice

“GitHub Enterprise — best developer velocity, largest ecosystem, strongest AI (Copilot); flexible but higher management overhead for compliance” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Source control · scale prompt · first choice

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.

“GitHub is a platform that some users may want to avoid due to its controversies” Llama 4 Maverick · Source control · negative prompt · hard negative

“Frequent outages ...; aggressive US DMCA takedowns; code/metadata used for AI training ... Avoid if EU data sovereignty, AI data concerns, or high uptime critical.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative

“the most frequently criticized for vendor lock-in, policy changes, regional/service restrictions, AI-training concerns, and occasional downtime” Perplexity Sonar · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative

“Platforms to Avoid if You Dislike AI-Training on Your Code ... many developers remain skeptical of Microsoft's licensing boundaries” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as GitHub, over the 230 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitHub was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GitLab204 of 23016Compare →

Bitbucket198 of 2305Compare →

Azure DevOps77 of 2303Not in the top three

Gitea70 of 2302Not in the top three

Forgejo36 of 2301Not in the top three

AWS CodeCommit36 of 2300Not in the top three

Azure Repos32 of 2300Not in the top three

Codeberg22 of 2302Not in the top three

SourceForge19 of 2300Not in the top three

Perforce Helix Core18 of 2300Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 172 of the 230 answers that named GitHub and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com57

guideflow.com54

mgsoftware.nl44

gitprotect.io39

us.fitgap.com39

note.com38

worldmetrics.org37

reddit.com34

devopsboys.com31

toolradar.com31

404 of the 404 domain citations in answers naming GitHub came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/version-control-software53

mgsoftware.nl/en/tools/best-version-control-systems44

note.com/snake_dragon/n/n87068052df3a38

gitprotect.io/blog/top-git-hosting-services30

devopsboys.com/blog/github-vs-gitlab-vs-bitbucket-202629

g2.com/categories/version-control-hosting28

bmc.com/blogs/github-vs-gitlab-vs-bitbucket27

slant.co/topics/153/~best-hosted-version-control-services25

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as GitHub

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as GitHub; a claim can dispute any of them.

GitHub Enterprise 5GitHub Enterprise Cloud 2GitHub Enterprise Server 2GitHub Free 2GitHub Team 2GitHub (Microsoft) 1GitHub (by Microsoft) 1GitHub Free Tier 1GitHub Teams 1

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 GitHub'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, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at github.io is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.