IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Harness FME · September 2026 Edition

Harness · 1 category · Named, not ranked

Harness FME

19Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

11 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

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Harness FME was named 8 times in Feature flags, where LaunchDarkly led with 30%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business31 of 33

under the label threshold

Mid-market12 of 31

under the label threshold

Enterprise11 of 33

under the label threshold

In feature flags · 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 Harness FME 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
Feature flags	Developer platform	0%	12 of 31	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by LaunchDarkly at 30%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Harness FME 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 Harness FME 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	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
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	0	0
Kimi K2	0	1	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	0	1

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

Direct3 labelsNone

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative19 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.

“An end-to-end DevOps platform with built-in feature release safety.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Feature flags · comparative prompt · alternative

“is also a strong choice” GPT-5.4 mini · Feature flags · paraphrase 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.

“making it less ideal if you are looking for a nimble, standalone feature management tool” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Feature flags · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Harness FME, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Harness FME was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

LaunchDarkly19 of 1914Not in the top three

Unleash16 of 190Not in the top three

Flagsmith15 of 191Not in the top three

Statsig13 of 190Not in the top three

GrowthBook10 of 191Not in the top three

ConfigCat6 of 191Not in the top three

PostHog5 of 191Not in the top three

DevCycle3 of 190Not in the top three

OpenFeature2 of 190Not in the top three

Optimizely Feature Experimentation2 of 190Not 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 Harness FME. 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 16 of the 19 answers that named Harness FME and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

harness.io12

guptadeepak.com8

launchdarkly.com6

configcat.com5

flagsmith.com5

growthbook.io5

guideflow.com5

kameleoon.com5

amplitude.com4

contentwave.net4

Fifty-nine of the fifty-nine domain citations in answers naming Harness FME came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

harness.io/blog/feature-flag-tools-compared-10-best-platforms-for-safer-releases10

guptadeepak.com/tools/top-5-feature-flag-management-tools-20268

kameleoon.com/blog/top-feature-flag-management-tools5

contentwave.net/article/launchdarkly-vs-split-vs-unleash-vs-flagsmith-june-2026-update4

flagsmith.com/compare/launchdarkly-vs-split4

gartner.com/reviews/market/feature-management4

guideflow.com/blog/feature-flag-software4

posthog.com/blog/best-feature-flag-software-for-developers4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Harness FME

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

Harness FME (Split) 1Harness FME (formerly Split.io) 1Harness Feature Management & Experimentation 1Harness Feature Management & Experimentation (FME) 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 Harness FME'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 Harness FME, 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 harness.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.