Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 20 → 24 of 78
1 category · RankedOpenCost
26Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
12 / 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.
Best standing
0% in FinOps for mid-market buyers
Rank 20 of 76 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 8% of its 12 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of OpenCost →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business25 of 83
0%13 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market20 of 76
0%12 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise48 of 73
0%1 label
under the label threshold
In finops · 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 OpenCost 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud cost management | Cloud and infrastructure | 0% | 20 of 76 | 8% | 12 | accepted challenger | =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, OpenCost held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · FinOps · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 17 → 19 of 70
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 25 → 46 of 71
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FinOps | 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 17 → 20 of 76 |
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 OpenCost 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 OpenCost 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 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative8 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained11 labelsNone
Scale-constrained1 labelNone
Negative4 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative26 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 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.
“consider OpenCost instead: it's free and open source, though it may take more engineering effort to run” GPT-6 Luna · FinOps · budget prompt · alternative
“Deep Kubernetes cost tracking | Any amount (Single cluster) | OpenCost (Open-source)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · FinOps · budget prompt · alternative
“Best Free Open Source Option ... OpenCost is unbeatable if you're running Kubernetes” Kimi K2 · FinOps · budget prompt · alternative
“Multi-cloud, still budget-conscious: look at open-source tools like OpenCost” GPT-5.4 mini · FinOps · 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.
“open-source projects (like older versions of OpenCost)... the maintenance overhead outweighs the license savings” Qwen 3.7 Flash · FinOps · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as OpenCost, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OpenCost was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as OpenCost, over the 26 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OpenCost 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 OpenCost. 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 24 of the 26 answers that named OpenCost and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cloudzero.com20
cloudaware.com18
amnic.com12
g2.com10
harness.io9
openmetal.io9
spendark.com9
vantage.sh9
usage.ai8
nops.io7
111 of the 111 domain citations in answers naming OpenCost came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
opencost.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, OpenCost takes 0% of first choices and Vantage takes 45%.ShowHide
Search and answers
opencost.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, OpenCost takes 0% of first choices and Vantage takes 45%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “cloud cost management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “cloud cost management platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 480 a month (“opencost”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 11 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 422 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 39 · 12 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 659
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 20 of 76 in finops
Segment leader
45%
Vantage
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 26 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 24 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 opencost.io
137
subdomains included
Content
34
counted in the table below
Documentation
38
Product · Integration
0 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 33 | 1 | 2026-07-21 | ||
| Report or ebook | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2026-07-21Opencost llmd inference cost blog
- 2026-02-23Opencost community meeting schedule blog
- 2025-12-17Opencost 2025 year in review blog
- 2025-12-09Introducing kubemodel blog
- 2025-10-30Kubecon na 2025 blog
- 2025-10-23Opencost mcp server blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page opencost.io 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.
Follow OpenCost
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
OpenCost is its own company.ShowHide
The company
OpenCost is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- open source cost monitoring for cloud native environments
- For
- Kubernetes practitioners
- Price stated
- Forever free and open source, supported and maintained by experts opencost.io
- Free plan or trial
- Forever free and open source opencost.io
- Certifications
- Cloud Native Computing Foundation incubating project
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, hosting, customers
What OpenCost's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: opencost.io, opencost.io/docs/integrations. 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 OpenCost'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 OpenCost, 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 OpenCost by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where OpenCost 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 OpenCost, 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.