Every category where a model named Google Secret Manager 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
Secrets management	Identity and access	0%	10 of 40	10%	31	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct10 labelsNone

Paraphrase13 labelsNone

Comparative23 labelsNone

Budget-constrained15 labelsNone

Scale-constrained14 labelsNone

Negative20 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative95 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“their native solution (AWS Secrets Manager, Azure Key Vault, or Google Cloud Secret Manager) may be simpler to adopt” MiniMax M2.5 · Secrets · scale prompt · alternative

“Best for Google Cloud users who want a simpler, cloud-native way to store and manage secrets with versioning” GPT-5.4 mini · Secrets · comparative prompt · alternative

“If you are Cloud-Native: Use the Native Cloud Service (AWS/Azure/GCP) to avoid third-party costs.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Secrets · budget prompt · alternative

“| Google Cloud Secret Manager | GCP environments | Native Google Cloud integration |” MiniMax M2.5 · Secrets · comparative 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.

“Caution: Tight coupling to one cloud provider makes multi-cloud or migration strategies difficult” Kimi K2 · Secrets · negative prompt · soft negative

“they lack polished developer workflows, fail to provide a cohesive local development experience” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Secrets · direct prompt · soft negative

“their dashboards are notoriously clunky for developers” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Secrets · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Google Secret Manager, over the 95 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Google Secret Manager was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

AWS Secrets Manager94 of 953Not in the top three

HashiCorp Vault92 of 9535Not in the top three

Azure Key Vault83 of 951Not in the top three

Doppler68 of 9526Not in the top three

Infisical59 of 9513Not in the top three

1Password46 of 955Not in the top three

Akeyless36 of 953Not in the top three

Bitwarden Secrets Manager25 of 952Not in the top three

CyberArk Conjur23 of 950Not in the top three

OpenBao20 of 951Not 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 Secret Manager. 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 69 of the 95 answers that named Google Secret Manager and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

blog.gitguardian.com52

envmanager.com40

startwithidentity.com34

safeguard.sh30

infisical.com29

doppler.com26

cycode.com24

guideflow.com23

akeyless.io21

cybervendorguide.com20

299 of the 299 domain citations in answers naming Google Secret Manager came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

blog.gitguardian.com/top-secrets-management-tools52

envmanager.com/blog/best-secrets-management-tools39

startwithidentity.com/rankings/best-secrets-management-tools27

cycode.com/blog/best-secrets-management-tools24

guideflow.com/blog/secrets-management-software23

safeguard.sh/resources/blog/best-secrets-management-and-vaulting-solutions18

cybervendorguide.com/guides/secrets-management14

infisical.com/blog/best-secret-management-tools14

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Google Secret Manager

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

Google Cloud Secret Manager 13GCP Secret Manager 7

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 Secret Manager'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 Secret Manager, 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.