Every category where a model named XCP-ng 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
Server virtualization platforms	Cloud and infrastructure	0%	12 of 78	5%	22	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for XCP-ng yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated XCP-ng across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	3	0	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1	0	2
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	2	0	1	3
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	0	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	2	1	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	0	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	1	2	0	3

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

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase6 labelsNone

Comparative12 labelsNone

Budget-constrained13 labelsNone

Scale-constrained8 labelsNone

Negative17 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative60 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.

“An open-source, community-backed fork of XenServer that delivers enterprise-grade virtualization without the licensing hurdles of Citrix.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Server virtualization · negative prompt · alternative

“Organizations wanting a VMware ESXi alternative with strong performance and open-source licensing.” Mistral Small · Server virtualization · comparative prompt · alternative

“Free open-source fork of Citrix Hypervisor; good performance... Solid for Windows-heavy workloads.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Server virtualization · budget prompt · alternative

“VMware alternatives with better pricing | Smaller ecosystem, fewer third-party integrations” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Server virtualization · scale 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.

“"Cautious for new deployments"” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Server virtualization · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as XCP-ng, over the 60 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and XCP-ng was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Proxmox VE59 of 6030Not among the top eight

VMware vSphere45 of 607Not among the top eight

Microsoft Hyper-V37 of 606Not among the top eight

Nutanix AHV35 of 601Not among the top eight

Red Hat OpenShift Virtualization19 of 600Not among the top eight

Citrix Hypervisor17 of 600Not among the top eight

Oracle Linux Virtualization Manager12 of 600Not among the top eight

Scale Computing11 of 602Not among the top eight

Hyper-V9 of 600Not among the top eight

Oracle VM VirtualBox9 of 600Not among the top eight

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 XCP-ng. 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 55 of the 60 answers that named XCP-ng and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ciopages.com23

guideflow.com21

cloudchipr.com20

us.fitgap.com18

gitnux.org16

horizoniq.com15

databank.com12

techdogs.com12

virtualizationhowto.com12

g2.com11

160 of the 160 domain citations in answers naming XCP-ng came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

ciopages.com/buyer-guides/virtualization-platform23

guideflow.com/blog/server-virtualization-software21

cloudchipr.com/blog/vmware-alternatives20

us.fitgap.com/search/server-virtualization-software/small-business12

horizoniq.com/blog/vmware-alternatives9

v2cloud.com/blog/top-5-virtualization-platforms9

cloudnuro.ai/blog/optimizing-virtual-environments-best-10-server-virtualization-software-i7

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-virtualization-platforms-features-pros-cons-comparison7

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

xcp-ng.org is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, XCP-ng takes 0% of first choices and Proxmox VE takes 42%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “server virtualization platform”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “server virtualization platforms”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 2,400 a month (“xcp-ng”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 89 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 4,455 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 5,475 · 97 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 1,709
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 edition

Share of first choices

rank 12 of 78 in server virtualization

Segment leader

42%

Proxmox VE

First choices: 0 across its categories
Named in: 60 answers
Its own site cited: in 55 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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

Addresses on xcp-ng.org

156

subdomains included

Content

counted in the table below

Documentation

Product · Integration

0 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest
Blog	45	8	2026-09-29
Report or ebook	16	16	2026-09-16
Conference or event	4	0	2026-04-01
Case study	1	0	2023-04-01
Glossary or explainer	1	1	2026-07-31

Most recent

2026-09-29Xen on riscv boots on the spacemit k3 our first rva23 board blog
2026-09-16Create use custom xcpng ubuntu templates report or ebook
2026-09-16Pfsense report or ebook
2026-09-16Xcpng in a vm report or ebook
2026-09-08September 2026 security updates 1 for xcp ng 8 3 lts blog
2026-09-03Xen on risc v just ran on real hardware blog

Events in person

Last twelve months

April 2, 2026 to April 3, 2026Xen Spring Meetup 2026Grenoble · spoke

As the event pages on xcp-ng.org state them, read October 5, 2026.

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page xcp-ng.org 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. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read October 5, 2026.

Names read as XCP-ng

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

Citrix Hypervisor / XenServer & XCP-ng 1XCP-ng (with Xen Orchestra) 1XCP-ng / Citrix Hypervisor 1

Follow XCP-ng

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

XCP-ng is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: the user-friendly, high-performance virtualization solution, developed collaboratively for unrestricted features and open-source accessibility
xcp-ng.org
For: anyone seeking a reliable virtualization solution
xcp-ng.org
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers

What XCP-ng's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: xcp-ng.org. 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 XCP-ng'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 XCP-ng, 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 XCP-ng by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where XCP-ng 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 XCP-ng, 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.