IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Orchest · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Orchest

3Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

3 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. Orchest was named 2 times in Orchestration, where Prefect led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market84 of 86

under the label threshold

Enterprise81 of 89

under the label threshold

In orchestration · 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 Orchest 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
Workflow orchestration	Data platform	0%	84 of 86	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by Prefect at 24%

Movement

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

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	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 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.

“Community project came and went; no longer maintained.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Orchestration · negative prompt · hard negative

“Officially retired/unmaintained.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Orchestration · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

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

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Temporal3 of 31Not in the top three

AWS Step Functions3 of 30Not in the top three

Apache Airflow2 of 30Not in the top three

Argo Workflows2 of 30Not in the top three

Microsoft Power Automate2 of 30Not in the top three

Prefect2 of 30Not in the top three

Apache Oozie1 of 30Not in the top three

Astronomer Astro1 of 30Not in the top three

Azkaban1 of 30Not in the top three

Bizagi1 of 30Not 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 Orchest. 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 3 answers that named Orchest and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

kanerika.com3

pracdata.io3

reddit.com3

kestra.io2

news.ycombinator.com2

supercenter.app2

teamwork.com2

unmeshed.io2

zapier.com2

zenml.io2

Twenty-three of the twenty-three domain citations in answers naming Orchest came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

kanerika.com/blogs/workflow-orchestration-tools3

pracdata.io/p/state-of-workflow-orchestration-ecosystem-20253

news.ycombinator.com/item2

reddit.com/r/ITManagers/comments/1soh54t/enterprise_workflow_orchestration_platforms2

supercenter.app/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools2

teamwork.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools2

unmeshed.io/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools-20262

zapier.com/blog/workflow-orchestration-tools2

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 Orchest'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 Orchest, 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 orchest.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.