Every category where a model named JetBrains TeamCity 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
CI/CD platforms	Developer platform	0%	43 of 45	47%	17	criticized challenger

Movement

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

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative13 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained6 labelsNone

Negative16 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative51 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.

“valued for robust build management and broad language/platform support” Perplexity Sonar · CI/CD · 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.

“TeamCity is also considered a legacy CI/CD provider. Many organizations are actively migrating away from it” Mistral Small · CI/CD · negative prompt · hard negative

“While TeamCity is used by enterprises, it's not immune to critical issues. CVE-2024-27198 was a critical authentication bypass vulnerability” Claude Haiku 4.5 · CI/CD · negative prompt · soft negative

“Recent 2026 breach in JetBrains' own Cadence service via unpatched CVE... On-prem setups prone to patch delays.” Grok 4.1 Fast · CI/CD · negative prompt · soft negative

“Teams often stick with tools like TeamCity or Bamboo past their prime... Avoid sunk-cost fallacies.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · CI/CD · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as JetBrains TeamCity, over the 50 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and JetBrains TeamCity was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Jenkins50 of 501Not in the top three

GitLab CI/CD48 of 5013Not in the top three

GitHub Actions42 of 5022Not in the top three

CircleCI40 of 500Not in the top three

Azure DevOps26 of 503Not in the top three

Buildkite24 of 501Not in the top three

Harness18 of 500Not in the top three

Atlassian Bamboo12 of 500Not in the top three

Travis CI8 of 500Not in the top three

Argo CD7 of 500Not 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 JetBrains TeamCity. 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 42 of the 50 answers that named JetBrains TeamCity and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

blog.jetbrains.comYour site27

toolradar.com27

octopus.com21

deployhq.com19

devopsness.com18

checkthat.ai13

circleci.com12

devopsplatforms.com11

harness.io11

technologymatch.com11

143 of the 170 domain citations in answers naming JetBrains TeamCity came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

toolradar.com/blog/best-ci-cd-tools25

blog.jetbrains.com/teamcity/2026/03/best-ci-tools24

deployhq.com/blog/best-ci-cd-software-top-10-tools-to-know-in-202518

devopsness.com/blog/best-cicd-platforms18

octopus.com/devops/ci-cd/ci-cd-tools-for-enterprise18

checkthat.ai/answers/what-are-the-best-ci-cd-tools12

devopsplatforms.com/buying-guides/best-ci-cd-platforms10

technologymatch.com/blog/jenkins-vs-gitlab-ci-vs-circleci-vs-github-actions-the-ci-cd-deci10

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as JetBrains TeamCity

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

TeamCity 14TeamCity (JetBrains) 2

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 JetBrains TeamCity'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 JetBrains TeamCity, 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 jetbrains.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.