Index › Vendors › OVH · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

OVH

4Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

3 of 12Models named it

2Categories

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. OVH was named 2 times in DDoS and 1 other category, where Cloudflare led with 93%. 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-market44 of 51

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In ddos · 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 OVH 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
DDoS protection	Network and edge	0%	44 of 51	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Cloudflare at 93%
Managed Kubernetes platforms	Cloud and infrastructure	0%	28 of 48	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Google Kubernetes Engine at 39%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	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	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0
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

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative4 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.

“Often ranked high for ease/privacy/cost in EU” Grok 4.1 Fast · Managed Kubernetes · negative 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.

“frequently respond to attacks by null-routing (blackholing your IP) rather than actually mitigating” DeepSeek V4 Flash · DDoS · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as OVH, over the 4 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OVH was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

DigitalOcean Kubernetes2 of 41Not in the top three

Linode Kubernetes Engine2 of 41Not in the top three

Amazon EKS2 of 40Not in the top three

Azure Kubernetes Service2 of 40Not in the top three

Google Kubernetes Engine2 of 40Not in the top three

Scaleway Kapsule2 of 40Not in the top three

Azure SQL Database1 of 41Not in the top three

Cloudflare1 of 41Not in the top three

AWS Shield1 of 40Not in the top three

Akamai Prolexic1 of 40Not 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 OVH. 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 4 of the 4 answers that named OVH and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

reddit.com3

blog.railway.com2

dev.to2

digitalocean.com2

g2.com2

linkedin.com2

medium.com2

portainer.io2

spot.rackspace.com2

akamai.com1

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

Pages cited

blog.railway.com/p/best-managed-kubernetes-hosting-20262

dev.to/dev_tips/comparing-the-top-10-managed-kubernetes-providers-2025-edition-12h82

medium.com/@elliotgraebert/comparing-the-top-eight-managed-kubernetes-providers-2ae39662392

portainer.io/blog/kubernetes-managed-services2

reddit.com/r/kubernetes/comments/1c7fs30/managed_kubernetes_the_big_3_versus_the_rest_of2

spot.rackspace.com/blog/kubernetes-managed-services2

akamai.com/blog/cloud/linode-kubernetes-engine-optimization1

andreidascalu.medium.com/the-awfulness-of-aws-eks-d7700c1eccdc1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as OVH

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

OVH (standard "Anti-DDoS" tier, not enterprise) 1

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 OVH'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 OVH, 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 the vendor's own domain 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.