Small business▼−16Since September 2026: 46% → 30%, −16 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.
30%from 46% in September 2026
Cleared the floor by 5 pointsRank 1 → 2 of 51
4 categories · RankedLiteLLM
193Judge labels
49First choices
30Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
31% in LLM gateways for mid-market buyers
Rank 1 of 69 in the mid-market standingendorsed leader
2 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 16% of its 58 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of LiteLLM →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business1 of 53
31%61 labels
endorsed leader
Mid-market1 of 69
31%58 labels
endorsed leader
Enterprise2 of 87
26%59 labels
accepted challenger
In llm gateways · 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 LiteLLM 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LLM gateways and observability | Data platform | 31% | 1 of 69 | 16% | 58 | endorsed leader | ▼−4Since September 2026: 38% → 33%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AI governance platforms | Data platform | 0% | 29 of 135 | 0% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Credo AI at 18% | |
| AI security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 63 of 233 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11% | |
| API gateways | Developer platform | 0% | 43 of 66 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Kong Gateway at 53% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, LiteLLM held within the floor in all four categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · LLM gateways · by segment
Mid-market▼−4Since September 2026: 38% → 33%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
33%from 38% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 1 of 54, unchanged
Enterprise▼−6Since September 2026: 29% → 23%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
23%from 29% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 1 → 2 of 75
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LLM gateways | 38% | 33% | ▼−4Since September 2026: 38% → 33%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 of 69, unchanged |
| AI governance | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 29 of 135, unchanged |
| AI security | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 63 of 233, unchanged |
| API gateways | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 44 → 43 of 66 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated LiteLLM across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated LiteLLM across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| Mistral Small | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
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
Direct34 labels12
Paraphrase20 labels7
Comparative42 labels18not counted in share
Budget-constrained49 labels27
Scale-constrained17 labels3
Negative31 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative193 labels in all, every segment counted; 49 of the 69 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.
“For the most budget-conscious, LiteLLM (free, open-source) and OpenRouter (low-fee pay-as-you-go) are top choices.” Mistral Small · LLM gateways · budget prompt · first choice
“If you are a Platform Engineer: Use LiteLLM. It allows you to standardize on one API key for the whole company” GLM 4.7 FlashX · LLM gateways · comparative prompt · first choice
“If your engineering team is already familiar with Docker and prefers open-source, deploy LiteLLM + Langfuse.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · LLM gateways · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“likely to be an open-source gateway such as LiteLLM, Bifrost, or Apache APISIX, which are free to license” Llama 4 Maverick · LLM gateways · budget prompt · first choice
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.
“High Caution/Avoid if Possible: LiteLLM (especially older/self-hosted versions): Suffered a major supply chain attack” Grok 4.20 · LLM gateways · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid: - LiteLLM in its current state (until security issues are fully resolved)” Kimi K2 · LLM gateways · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid LiteLLM unless you have dedicated security engineering” DeepSeek V4 Flash · LLM gateways · negative prompt · hard negative
“LiteLLM (Exercise Extreme Caution)... its massive adoption has made it the target of highly sophisticated attacks and a flurry of severe security vulnerabilities” Gemini 3.5 Flash · LLM gateways · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LiteLLM, over the 193 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LiteLLM was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as LiteLLM, over the 193 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LiteLLM was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. 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 LiteLLM. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 189 of the 193 answers that named LiteLLM and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
getmaxim.ai98
openrouter.ai90
dev.to79
truefoundry.com67
respan.ai65
portkey.ai53
llmgateway.io52
cloudzero.com51
dataiku.com45
docs.litellm.aiYour site43
600 of the 643 domain citations in answers naming LiteLLM came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where LiteLLM stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where LiteLLM stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “llm gateway”
5
Position for “llm gateways”
2
- Searches for its name, Google
- 22,200 a month (“litellm”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 264 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 15,281 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 1,686 · 205 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 5,231
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
31%
rank 1 of 69 in LLM gateways
First choices
49
across its categories
- Named in
- 193 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 189 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on litellm.ai
1,357
subdomains included
Content
19
counted in the table below
Documentation
1,114
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Report or ebook | 11 | undated | |||
| Glossary or explainer | 4 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 2 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 2 | 1 | 2026-09-26 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-26Litellm roi calculator template or tool
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page litellm.ai exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as LiteLLM
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as LiteLLM; a claim can dispute any of them.
LiteLLM Enterprise 1
Follow LiteLLM
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
LiteLLM is its own company.ShowHide
The company
LiteLLM is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Open-Source AI Gateway & LLM Proxy
- For
- platform teams
- Price stated
- $0 Free forever. litellm.ai
- Starting price
- 0 litellm.ai
- Free plan or trial
- $0 Free forever. Includes: 140+ LLM provider integrations, Langfuse, Arize Phoenix, LangSmith, and OTEL logging, Virtual keys, budgets, and teams, Load balancing and RPM/TPM limits, LLM guardrails. No credit card. Self-host in minutes. litellm.ai
- Integrations claimed
- 140 litellm.ai · 100 litellm.ai/pricing pages disagree
- Certifications
- MIT-licensed
- Customers named
- NVIDIALemonadeNetflixOktaAT&T Data Office
- Not stated on the pages read
- Hosting
What LiteLLM's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: litellm.ai, litellm.ai/pricing, trust.litellm.ai. A claimed page can correct any of 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 LiteLLM'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 LiteLLM, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for LiteLLM by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where LiteLLM is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name LiteLLM, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where LiteLLM is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where LiteLLM is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideAI models recommend LiteLLM first in LLM gateways and observability this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.