Index › Products › npm Registry · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

npm Registry

3Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

3 / 14Models named it

1Category

October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, 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. npm Registry was named 2 times in Artifact registries, where JFrog Artifactory led with 14%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business79 of 86

under the label threshold

Mid-market86 of 89

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In artifact registries · 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 npm Registry 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
Artifact and container registries	Developer platform	0%	86 of 89	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by JFrog Artifactory at 14%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for npm Registry yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated npm Registry across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	0

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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“Risk Level: CRITICAL — Active, ongoing large-scale attacks” Kimi K2 · Artifact registries · negative prompt · hard negative

“has become a hotbed of malware” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Artifact registries · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as npm Registry, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and npm Registry was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GitHub Packages3 of 31Not among the top eight

PyPI3 of 30Not among the top eight

JFrog Artifactory2 of 31Not among the top eight

Azure Container Registry2 of 30Not among the top eight

Docker Hub2 of 30Not among the top eight

Google Artifact Registry2 of 30Not among the top eight

Harbor2 of 30Not among the top eight

Maven Central2 of 30Not among the top eight

Nexus Repository2 of 30Not among the top eight

Quay.io2 of 30Not among the top eight

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 npm Registry. 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 2 of the 3 answers that named npm Registry and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

chainguard.dev2

cisa.gov2

kodekloud.com2

paloaltonetworks.com2

paloaltonetworks.jp2

safeguard.sh2

access.redhat.com1

aquasec.com1

armosec.io1

arxiv.org1

No domain is on file for npm Registry, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

chainguard.dev/supply-chain-security-101/the-npm-registry-cant-protect-you-the-new-javascr2

cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2025/09/23/widespread-supply-chain-compromise-impacting-npm-ec2

kodekloud.com/blog/the-hidden-risks-in-public-container-registries-and-how-to-mitigate-the2

paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/container-registry-security2

paloaltonetworks.jp/cyberpedia/container-registry-security2

access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:193751

access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:64971

access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2026-325891

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as npm Registry

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

npm Registry (registry.npmjs.org) 1

Follow npm Registry

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.

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 npm Registry'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 npm Registry, 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 npm Registry by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where npm Registry 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 npm Registry, 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.