IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Logto · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Logto

5Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

2 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Logto was named 2 times in CIAM, where Auth0 led with 22%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business24 of 52

under the label threshold

Mid-market23 of 74

under the label threshold

Enterprise28 of 60

under the label threshold

In ciam · 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 Logto 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
Customer identity and access management	Identity and access	0%	23 of 74	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Auth0 at 22%

Movement

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

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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.

“Choose Logto if you want flexibility between cloud and self-hosted” MiniMax M2.5 · CIAM · budget prompt · alternative

“Logto (modern, Node-based)... Choose Logto or Keycloak: 100% free” Gemini 3.5 Flash · CIAM · budget 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Logto, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Logto was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Clerk5 of 52Not in the top three

Auth05 of 50Not in the top three

Supabase Auth3 of 50Not in the top three

WorkOS2 of 51Not in the top three

Firebase Authentication2 of 50Not in the top three

Keycloak2 of 50Not in the top three

Kinde2 of 50Not in the top three

BetterAuth1 of 50Not in the top three

Frontegg1 of 50Not in the top three

FusionAuth1 of 50Not 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 Logto. 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 3 of the 5 answers that named Logto and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

loginradius.com2

startwithidentity.com2

blog.logto.ioYour site1

capterra.com1

cdp.com1

clerk.com1

descope.com1

designrevision.com1

firebase.google.com1

freetier.co1

Eleven of the twelve domain citations in answers naming Logto came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

blog.logto.io/firebase-authentication-pricing1

capterra.com/ciam-software1

cdp.com/articles/cdp-evaluation-criteria1

cdp.com/basics/how-to-choose-the-right-customer-data-platform-cdp1

clerk.com/articles/clerk-pricing-explained1

clerk.com/articles/clerk-vs-auth0-which-authentication-platform-fits-your-team-31

descope.com/blog/post/ciam-solutions1

designrevision.com/blog/auth-providers-compared1

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 Logto'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 Logto, 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 logto.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.