Every category where a model named Google Cloud Firestore 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
NoSQL databases	Data platform	0%	13 of 72	0%	10	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Google Cloud Firestore 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 Google Cloud Firestore across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase12 labels3

Comparative3 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained10 labels2

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative6 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative40 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 8 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.

“Has a generous free tier and is described as the cheapest for small workloads.[3]” Perplexity Sonar · NoSQL · budget prompt · alternative

“GCP | Firestore (document) + Cloud Memorystore (Redis).” MiniMax M2.5 · NoSQL · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Prefer managed: AWS DynamoDB, Google Firestore, Azure Cosmos DB” Grok 4.1 Fast · NoSQL · negative prompt · alternative

“AWS DynamoDB (or Firestore for mobile)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · NoSQL · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Cloud Firestore, over the 40 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Cloud Firestore was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

MongoDB37 of 4023Not in the top three

Amazon DynamoDB35 of 401Not in the top three

Redis25 of 401Not in the top three

Couchbase16 of 402Not in the top three

Apache Cassandra16 of 400Not in the top three

PostgreSQL13 of 402Not in the top three

Azure Cosmos DB11 of 400Not in the top three

ScyllaDB9 of 400Not in the top three

Apache HBase6 of 400Not in the top three

Neo4j6 of 400Not 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 Google Cloud Firestore. 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 21 of the 40 answers that named Google Cloud Firestore and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

sourceforge.net14

aerospike.com11

guideflow.com9

topbusinesssoftware.com9

g2.com8

mongodb.com8

scylladb.com8

geeksforgeeks.org7

reddit.com6

dataversity.net5

Eighty-five of the eighty-five domain citations in answers naming Google Cloud Firestore came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

aerospike.com/blog/ten-best-nosql-cloud-databases9

guideflow.com/blog/nosql-database-software9

sourceforge.net/software/nosql-database/for-small-business5

topbusinesssoftware.com/categories/nosql-database/small-business-orgs5

alex-klaus.com/reasons-not-to-nosql4

dataversity.net/articles/nosql-databases-advantages-and-disadvantages4

datavid.com/blog/best-nosql-databases4

g2.com/discussions/what-is-the-best-document-database-for-a-small-saas-app-that-is-mostly-4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Google Cloud Firestore

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

Firestore 2Cloud Firestore 1Couchbase / Firestore 1Firebase Firestore 1Google Firestore 1Supabase/Firestore 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 Google Cloud Firestore'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 Cloud Firestore, 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 google.dev 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.