Every category where a model named Google Artifact Registry 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	3%	10 of 89	3%	37	accepted challenger
Container and Kubernetes security	Cloud and infrastructure	0%	56 of 77	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Trivy at 22%	newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now.

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Google Artifact Registry 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 Google Artifact Registry 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	1	1	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	5	0	0	6
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	2	0	2	0	4
Mistral Small	2	1	0	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	2	1	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	1	2	0	4
Kimi K2	0	1	2	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	1	1	0	0	2
GPT-6 Luna	0	2	0	0	2
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	2	0	0	2

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase22 labels5

Comparative38 labels3not counted in share

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained11 labelsNone

Negative25 labels9not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative111 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 17 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.

“You generally do not need to avoid major, established providers like AWS Elastic Container Registry (ECR), Google Artifact Registry, Azure Container Registry (ACR)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Artifact registries · negative prompt · first choice

“Prefer private/managed registries: Use AWS ECR, Google Artifact Registry, Azure Container Registry (ACR)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Artifact registries · negative prompt · first choice

“Amazon ECR or Google Artifact Registry is the safest, most secure, and most scalable bet.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Artifact registries · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Artifact registries like JFrog Artifactory and Google Artifact Registry are more comprehensive” Mistral Small · Artifact registries · comparative 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.

“Default IAM permissions are too broad” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Artifact registries · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Artifact Registry, over the 111 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Artifact Registry was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

JFrog Artifactory83 of 11127Not among the top eight

Azure Container Registry75 of 1111Not among the top eight

Harbor71 of 1114Not among the top eight

GitHub Packages65 of 11119Not among the top eight

Docker Hub63 of 1112Not among the top eight

Sonatype Nexus Repository38 of 1116Not among the top eight

Amazon Elastic Container Registry28 of 1114Not among the top eight

AWS ECR28 of 1111Not among the top eight

Cloudsmith26 of 1112Not among the top eight

AWS CodeArtifact24 of 1110Not 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 Google Artifact Registry. 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 99 of the 111 answers that named Google Artifact Registry and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

harness.io41

blog.railway.com35

ciopages.com33

jfrog.com30

tech-insider.org29

docs.cloud.google.comYour site27

g2.com27

safeguard.sh25

thectoclub.com25

gitnux.org24

269 of the 296 domain citations in answers naming Google Artifact Registry came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

blog.railway.com/p/best-container-registries-202635

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/container-registry-artifact-management33

tech-insider.org/ecr-vs-acr-vs-artifact-registry-202628

harness.io/blog/best-artifact-repository-tools25

thectoclub.com/tools/best-artifact-repository-tools25

guptadeepak.com/tools/top-8-container-registries-202621

parse.gl/prompts/p/best-artifactcontainer-registry-across-clouds--a0e4540f-a716-4a19-b5e4-18

daily.dev/blog/top-9-container-registries-2024-how-to-choose16

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where Google Artifact Registry stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 390 a month (“google artifact registry”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 28 a month
Its own site: It sits on Google Cloud's site (google.com), so there are no site figures for it alone

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 10 of 89 in artifact registries

Segment leader

14%

JFrog Artifactory

First choices: 5 across its categories
Named in: 111 answers
Its own site cited: in 99 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 Google Artifact Registry

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

Google Artifact Registry (GAR) 8Google Container Registry (GCR) / Artifact Registry 1

Follow Google Artifact Registry

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

Google Cloud is the company behind Google Artifact Registry.

ShowHide

On record

Company records

Also from Google Cloud: Google 2-Step Verification, Google Alerts, Google AlloyDB for PostgreSQL, Google Analytics, Google Antigravity, Google AutoML, Google BigQuery ML, Google BigQuery Omni and 84 more

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Customers named: Branch BasicsOliver Pluff & Co.VIM & VIGRCOVRY
Not stated on the pages read: Positioning, who it is for, price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting

What Google Artifact Registry's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: google.com, google.com/adwords/express/pricing, google.com/admob/platform.html. 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 Google Artifact Registry'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 Google Artifact Registry, 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 Google Artifact Registry by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Google Artifact Registry 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 Google Artifact Registry, 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.