Small business▲+1Since September 2026: 13% → 14%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
14%from 13% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 2 of 20, unchanged
2 categories · RankedGitLab
260Judge labels
37First choices
35Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
30% in Source control for enterprise buyers
Rank 2 of 33 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 14% of its 81 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of GitLab →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business2 of 22
12%83 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market2 of 33
21%81 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise2 of 42
30%82 labels
endorsed leader
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 GitLab 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 | 21% | 2 of 33 | 14% | 81 | accepted challenger | ▲+5Since September 2026: 19% → 24%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Dynamic application security testing | Developer platform | 0% | 40 of 58 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by OWASP ZAP at 29% |
Movement
Since September 2026, GitLab held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Source control · by segment
Mid-market▲+5Since September 2026: 19% → 24%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
24%from 19% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 2 of 29, unchanged
Enterprise▲+7Since September 2026: 28% → 35%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
35%from 28% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 2 of 36, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source control | 19% | 24% | ▲+5Since September 2026: 19% → 24%, +5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 2 of 33, unchanged |
| DAST | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 40 of 58, 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 GitLab 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 GitLab 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 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Mistral Small | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 1 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 6 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 7 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 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
Direct41 labels3
Paraphrase44 labels12
Comparative44 labels7not counted in share
Budget-constrained44 labels12
Scale-constrained39 labels10
Negative48 labels6not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative260 labels in all, every segment counted; 37 of the 50 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.
“GitLab Ultimate/Premium | Unmatched "single-pane-of-glass" DevOps platform. Exceptional built-in CI/CD, security scanning, and compliance tracking.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Source control · scale prompt · first choice
“GitLab is a popular choice among developers and offers a free plan with unlimited public and private repositories, making it a cost-effective option” Llama 4 Maverick · Source control · budget prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend starting with a pilot of GitHub Enterprise Server or GitLab Self-Managed, as both offer the best balance of enterprise features” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Source control · scale prompt · first choice
“I would recommend GitLab if you want the best balance of repository hosting, built-in CI/CD, security, and compliance in one platform.” Perplexity Sonar · Source control · paraphrase 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.
“GitLab SaaS - not budget-friendly for small, scaling teams” Llama 4 Maverick · Source control · negative prompt · hard negative
“GitLab SaaS is also worth caution, since one source describes it as not budget-friendly for small, scaling teams” Perplexity Sonar · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative
“GitLab (Self-hosted) | ⚠️ Be cautious - Critical CVEs and configuration risks require expertise” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative
“GitLab SaaS | CAUTION | High costs for scaling teams ("Budget Trap").” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Source control · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as GitLab, over the 250 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitLab was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as GitLab, over the 250 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitLab 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 GitLab. 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 218 of the 250 answers that named GitLab and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
g2.com85
about.gitlab.comYour site69
it-ai-index.com66
guptadeepak.com60
github.com59
guideflow.com56
docs.github.com55
us.fitgap.com54
bitbucket.org53
zipdo.co40
528 of the 597 domain citations in answers naming GitLab came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
gitlab.com ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, GitLab takes 21% of first choices and GitHub takes 70%.ShowHide
Search and answers
gitlab.com ranks 4 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, GitLab takes 21% of first choices and GitHub takes 70%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “source control hosting platform”
7
Position for “source control hosting platforms”
4
- Searches for its name, Google
- 90,500 a month (“gitlab”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 4,844 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 603,028 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 45,795 · 4,976 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 200,375
- Paid Google search
- 4 searches its ads show for, about 39 clicks and $884 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
21%
rank 2 of 33 in source control
Segment leader
70%
GitHub
- First choices
- 37 across its categories
- Named in
- 250 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 218 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 gitlab.com
25,331
subdomains included
Content
3,481
counted in the table below
Documentation
71
Product · Integration
166 · 9
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 2,282 | undated | SAST, Feature flags | ||
| Conference or event | 588 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 247 | undated | |||
| News or press | 219 | undated | |||
| Case study | 96 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 19 | 0 | 2024-07-01 | ||
| Comparison | 12 | 1 | 2026-09-16 | SAST | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 10 | 1 | 2026-10-06 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 6 | 0 | 2025-05-29 | ||
| Podcast or video | 2 | 0 | 2019-07-03 |
Most recent
- 2026-10-06GitLab Transcend Virtual webinar or virtual event
- 2026-09-16When to use SAST versus an LLM security scanner comparison
- 2025-05-29What is a large language model llm glossary or explainer
- 2024-11-14What is git the ultimate guide to gits role and functionality glossary or explainer
- 2024-09-27What is gitflow glossary or explainer
- 2024-09-24Git pull vs git fetch whats the difference comparison
Events in person
Upcoming
- November 20, 2026GitLab Epic Tour MumbaiSofitel Mumbai BKC, Mumbai, India · hosts
Last twelve months
- August 12, 2026GitLab Epic Tour MelbourneSofitel Melbourne on Collins, Melbourne, AU · hosted
- July 28, 2026GitLab Epic Tour SydneySofitel Sydney Darling Harbour, Sydney, AU · hosted
- June 4, 2026Bank of America Global Technology ConferenceSan Francisco, US · spoke
- March 5, 2026Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom ConferenceSan Francisco, US · hybrid · spoke
As the event pages on gitlab.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page gitlab.com 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.
Names read as GitLab
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as GitLab; a claim can dispute any of them.
GitLab Ultimate 4GitLab Free 3GitLab SaaS 3GitLab (SaaS) 2GitLab CE 2GitLab (SaaS Version) 1GitLab CE (self-hosted) 1GitLab Premium 1GitLab Self-Managed 1
Follow GitLab
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
GitLab is its own company.ShowHide
The company
GitLab is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The intelligent orchestration platform for DevSecOps, enabling teams and agents to ship trusted software at enterprise scale.
- For
- teams and agents
- Price stated
- Commit once, adjust anytime with flexible pricing gitlab.com
- Free plan or trial
- Get free trial gitlab.com
- Certifications
- CCPACSA STARCSA Trusted Cloud ProviderGDPRISO/IEC 27001ISO/IEC 27017:2015ISO/IEC 27018:2019ISO/IEC 42001:2023
- Customers named
- nvidiabarclayslockheed martinthalesericssondeutsche telekomagodaHackerOne
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, hosting
What GitLab's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: gitlab.com, trust.gitlab.com, gitlab.com/gitlab-org/fulfillment/platform. 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 GitLab'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 GitLab, 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 GitLab by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where GitLab 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 GitLab, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where GitLab is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where GitLab is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideGitLab is among the products AI models recommend first in Source control hosting this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.