IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Render Postgres · September 2026 Edition

Render · 1 category · Named, not ranked

Render Postgres

17Judge labels

0First choices

5Negative labels

8 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

9 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Render Postgres was named 9 times in Managed databases, where Amazon RDS led with 32%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business15 of 63

under the label threshold

Mid-market29 of 73

under the label threshold

Enterprise71 of 78

under the label threshold

In managed databases · 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 Render Postgres 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
Managed relational databases	Data platform	0%	29 of 73	33%	9	under 10 labels · led by Amazon RDS at 32%

Movement

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

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	2	0	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative7 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative17 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.

“Best for serverless/auto‑scaling with pay‑as‑you‑go: Railway / Render / Neon.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Managed databases · budget prompt · alternative

“Heroku-like simplicity | Railway, Render, Northflank” Kimi K2 · Managed databases · negative prompt · alternative

“look at Render, Railway, or Northflank” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Managed databases · negative prompt · alternative

“Key advantage: Cheapest always-on Postgres” Kimi K2 · Managed databases · 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.

“Why avoid: The free tier is deleted after 30 days” Mistral Small · Managed databases · negative prompt · hard negative

“Render (recently removed Postgres free tier) all followed this pattern” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Managed databases · negative prompt · soft negative

“Less mature for prod” Grok 4.1 Fast · Managed databases · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Render Postgres, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Render Postgres was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Neon16 of 175Not in the top three

Supabase14 of 173Not in the top three

Amazon RDS13 of 171Not in the top three

Railway11 of 170Not in the top three

DigitalOcean Managed Databases10 of 176Not in the top three

Azure SQL Database10 of 170Not in the top three

PlanetScale10 of 170Not in the top three

Google Cloud SQL8 of 170Not in the top three

Linode Managed Databases7 of 171Not in the top three

Amazon Aurora6 of 171Not 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 Render Postgres. 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 13 of the 17 answers that named Render Postgres and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

auxiliar.ai12

toolradar.com9

aws.amazon.com7

cloudpricecheck.com6

northflank.com6

selfhost.dev6

digitalocean.com5

bytebase.com4

cloudcostcutter.cloud4

cloudexpat.com4

Sixty-three of the sixty-three domain citations in answers naming Render Postgres came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

auxiliar.ai/database11

toolradar.com/best/managed-databases/for/small-businesses7

aws.amazon.com/rds/pricing6

cloudpricecheck.com/guides/choosing-cloud-database6

northflank.com/blog/best-database-providers5

aws.amazon.com/rds/free4

cloudcostcutter.cloud/article/managed-postgres-cost-comparison-20264

cloudexpat.com/compare/rds-vs-azure-sql-vs-cloud-sql4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Render Postgres

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

Render 6Railway / Render / Neon 1Render (Postgres) 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 Render Postgres'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 Render Postgres, 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 render.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.