Every category where a model named JFrog Xray 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
Software composition analysis	Developer platform	0%	18 of 49	8%	13	accepted challenger
Container and Kubernetes security	Cloud and infrastructure	0%	30 of 78	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Aqua Security at 18%

Movement

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

Direct9 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative17 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labels1

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative37 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.

“Registry‑centric security → JFrog Xray (if using JFrog)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Container security · comparative prompt · alternative

“Already using JFrog Artifactory? → JFrog Xray” DeepSeek V4 Flash · SCA · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best For: Teams already using JFrog Artifactory” Kimi K2 · SCA · 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.

“tight coupling with JFrog Artifactory that limits its value as a standalone tool, with limited remediation guidance ... and no reachability analysis, leading to higher false positive rates” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SCA · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as JFrog Xray, over the 37 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and JFrog Xray was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Black Duck33 of 376Not in the top three

Snyk Open Source32 of 3711Not in the top three

Sonatype Lifecycle29 of 377Not in the top three

Mend.io29 of 370Not in the top three

Checkmarx SCA18 of 370Not in the top three

Endor Labs17 of 374Not in the top three

FOSSA17 of 370Not in the top three

GitHub Advanced Security11 of 370Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Check10 of 370Not in the top three

Veracode10 of 370Not 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 JFrog Xray. 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 29 of the 37 answers that named JFrog Xray and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

endorlabs.com23

guideflow.com17

ox.security16

sonatype.com16

cycode.com13

safeguard.sh12

expertinsights.com11

blackduck.com10

aikido.dev9

gartner.com9

136 of the 136 domain citations in answers naming JFrog Xray came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools-05b7a22

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools18

guideflow.com/blog/software-composition-analysis-tools16

ox.security/blog/software-composition-analysis-and-sca-tools15

sonatype.com/compare/best-sca-tools13

cycode.com/blog/top-enterprise-sca-tools11

expertinsights.com/application-security/the-top-software-composition-analysis-tools10

blackduck.com/resources/analyst-reports/forrester-wave-software-composition-analysis.html8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as JFrog Xray

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

Jfrog Xray 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 JFrog Xray'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 JFrog Xray, 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 jfrog.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.