IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Optimizely Feature Experimentation · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Optimizely Feature Experimentation

7Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

7 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

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Optimizely Feature Experimentation was named 3 times in Feature flags, where LaunchDarkly led with 30%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business30 of 33

under the label threshold

Mid-market31 of 31

under the label threshold

Enterprise17 of 33

under the label threshold

In feature flags · 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 Optimizely Feature Experimentation 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
Feature flags	Developer platform	0%	31 of 31	67%	3	under 10 labels · led by LaunchDarkly at 30%

Movement

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

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

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative7 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.

“though it is often more complex and expensive than specialized flag tools” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Feature flags · comparative prompt · soft negative

“High cost, overkill for pure flags” Grok 4.1 Fast · Feature flags · comparative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Optimizely Feature Experimentation, over the 7 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Optimizely Feature Experimentation was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

LaunchDarkly7 of 75Not in the top three

Unleash7 of 70Not in the top three

ConfigCat6 of 70Not in the top three

Flagsmith6 of 70Not in the top three

Statsig6 of 70Not in the top three

Split5 of 71Not in the top three

GrowthBook4 of 70Not in the top three

PostHog3 of 70Not in the top three

CloudBees2 of 70Not in the top three

Harness FME2 of 70Not 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 Optimizely Feature Experimentation. 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 7 of the 7 answers that named Optimizely Feature Experimentation and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

harness.io5

amplitude.com4

getunleash.io4

guptadeepak.com4

statsig.com4

toolradar.com4

gitnux.org3

growthbook.io3

guideflow.com3

zendikt.com3

Thirty-seven of the thirty-seven domain citations in answers naming Optimizely Feature Experimentation came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

harness.io/blog/feature-flag-tools-compared-10-best-platforms-for-safer-releases5

guptadeepak.com/tools/top-5-feature-flag-management-tools-20264

toolradar.com/guides/best-feature-flag-tools4

gitnux.org/best/feature-flags-software3

zendikt.com/category/feature-flag-software3

amplitude.com/compare/best-feature-flag-tools2

amplitude.com/compare/top-feature-flag-solutions-for-product-teams2

cpoclub.com/tools/best-feature-flag-software2

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 Optimizely Feature Experimentation'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 Optimizely Feature Experimentation, 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 optimi.com 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.