IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Google Cloud Workflows · September 2026 Edition

Google Cloud · 1 category · Named, not ranked

Google Cloud Workflows

16Judge labels

0First choices

6Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

7 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Google Cloud Workflows was named 7 times in Orchestration, where Prefect led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business27 of 78

under the label threshold

Mid-market23 of 86

under the label threshold

Enterprise86 of 89

under the label threshold

In orchestration · 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 Google Cloud Workflows 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
Workflow orchestration	Data platform	0%	23 of 86	14%	7	under 10 labels · led by Prefect at 24%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative16 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“GCP‑centric event‑driven workflows | Google Cloud Workflows” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Orchestration · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best Serverless "Pay-As-You-Go"” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Orchestration · 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.

“Tools like AWS Step Functions, Google Cloud Workflows, and Azure Logic Apps... leads to deep vendor lock-in” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Orchestration · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Cloud Workflows, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Cloud Workflows was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Prefect14 of 163Not in the top three

Apache Airflow13 of 161Not in the top three

AWS Step Functions13 of 160Not in the top three

Zapier12 of 162Not in the top three

Dagster10 of 161Not in the top three

Temporal10 of 161Not in the top three

Camunda9 of 160Not in the top three

Make9 of 160Not in the top three

n8n8 of 161Not in the top three

Workato6 of 160Not 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 Workflows. 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 12 of the 16 answers that named Google Cloud Workflows and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

elementum.ai11

wrike.com9

devopsschool.com8

enate.io7

teamwork.com7

zapier.com6

unmeshed.io5

kestra.io4

moxo.com4

nected.ai4

Sixty-five of the sixty-five domain citations in answers naming Google Cloud Workflows came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

elementum.ai/blog/best-workflow-orchestration-tools11

wrike.com/workflow-guide/workflow-orchestration-tools9

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-workflow-orchestration-tools-features-pros-cons-comparison8

enate.io/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools7

teamwork.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools7

zapier.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools6

unmeshed.io/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools-20265

moxo.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Google Cloud Workflows

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

GCP Cloud Workflows 1Google Workflows 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 Workflows'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 Workflows, 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.com 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.