Every category where a model named Kestra 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	2%	9 of 86	0%	16	accepted challenger
ETL and ELT	Data platform	0%	45 of 66	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Airbyte at 32%
LLM gateways and observability	Data platform	0%	60 of 63	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by LiteLLM at 38%

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	1	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	2	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1	1	3
Kimi K2	1	1	0	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	1	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	0	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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase6 labelsNone

Comparative11 labelsNone

Budget-constrained6 labels1

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 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.

“or Kestra if you need more power and flexibility across different workflow types” Kimi K2 · Orchestration · budget prompt · first choice

“Use open-standard alternatives (like Temporal, Camunda, or Kestra) if portability is a priority.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Orchestration · negative prompt · alternative

“Kestra uses YAML to define pipelines, making it completely language-agnostic.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Orchestration · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Self‑hosted, developer‑friendly automation | n8n or Kestra” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Orchestration · 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.

“Kestra: Workflow engines can become vectors for shell execution and accessing container metadata.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · LLM gateways · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Kestra, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Kestra was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Apache Airflow27 of 314Not in the top three

Prefect25 of 316Not in the top three

Dagster22 of 313Not in the top three

Temporal19 of 311Not in the top three

n8n15 of 314Not in the top three

Zapier12 of 311Not in the top three

Make11 of 312Not in the top three

Camunda11 of 310Not in the top three

AWS Step Functions8 of 310Not in the top three

Astronomer Astro8 of 310Not 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 Kestra. 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 21 of the 31 answers that named Kestra and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

elementum.ai13

kestra.ioYour site12

zapier.com12

enate.io11

reddit.com9

teamwork.com9

devopsschool.com6

getorchestra.io6

worldmetrics.org6

wrike.com6

Seventy-eight of the ninety domain citations in answers naming Kestra came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

elementum.ai/blog/best-workflow-orchestration-tools13

zapier.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools12

enate.io/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools11

teamwork.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools9

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-workflow-orchestration-tools-features-pros-cons-comparison6

worldmetrics.org/best/workflow-orchestration-software6

wrike.com/workflow-guide/workflow-orchestration-tools6

moxo.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 Kestra'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 Kestra, 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 kestra.io 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.