Artifact and container registries · November 2026 Edition
Amazon ECR vs Harbor
Zero of fourteen models named Amazon ECR first on the direct prompt; zero named Harbor. Amazon ECR was named by ten of the fourteen models and Harbor by fourteen and Amazon ECR carries 14 labels and Harbor 42, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Amazon ECR
accepted challengerNamed in one category this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share8%5%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate7%5%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#5A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels1442A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Amazon ECR reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.JFrog Artifactory was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. Sonatype Nexus Repository vs Amazon ECR · Sonatype Nexus Repository vs Harbor · JFrog Artifactory vs Amazon ECR
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the artifact and container registries page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Amazon ECRFirst choices, of fourteen modelsHarbor
Direct00
Paraphrase521 against Harbor
Comparative00
Budget-constrained01
Scale-constrained00
Negative011 against Amazon ECR · 1 against Harbor
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Amazon ECR and Harbor were named in the same answer thirty-four times, of the 44 answers naming Amazon ECR and the 122 naming Harbor. In those answers Harbor took the first choice two times and Amazon ECR five.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Amazon ECR and Harbor stood in it.
| Model | DirectAE | ParaphraseAE | ComparativeAE | Budget-constrainedAE | Scale-constrainedAE | NegativeAE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | AE | |||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | ||||
| Perplexity Sonar | AE | AE | | |||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | AE | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | AE | | | |||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | AE | AE | | | ||
| Kimi K2 | | | ||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | AE | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | AE | AE | ||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | AE | |
AE Amazon ECR HarborAE first choiceAE named as an alternativeAE argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Amazon ECR on the left and Harbor on the right.
HarborAE first choiceAE named as an alternativeAE argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Amazon ECR on the left and Harbor on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Amazon ECR and Harbor stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Grok 4.20JFrog Artifactory alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, Cloudsmith, GHCR, GitHub Packages, Harbor, ProGet, Sonatype Lifecycle
Mistral SmallJFrog Artifactory alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, Cloudsmith, Google Artifact Registry, Harbor, Sonatype Nexus Repository
GLM 4.7 FlashXSonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: Harbor, JFrog Artifactory
Neither was named
11 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Artifactory, Nexus Repository alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, GitHub Packages, GitLab Package Registry
GPT-5.4 miniSonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, JFrog Artifactory
Gemini 3.5 FlashGitHub Packages, GitLab Package Registry alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, Cloudsmith, ECR, JFrog Artifactory, Sonatype Nexus Repository
Perplexity SonarCloudsmith alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, GitHub Packages, JFrog Artifactory, Sonatype Nexus Repository
DeepSeek V4 FlashGitHub Packages, JFrog Artifactory alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, Azure Artifacts, Cloudsmith, Google Artifact Registry, Sonatype Nexus Repository
Llama 4 MaverickJFrog Artifactory alternatives: Amazon Elastic Container Registry, GitHub Packages, Google Artifact Registry, Sonatype Nexus Repository
Qwen 3.7 FlashJFrog Artifactory alternatives: AWS ECR, Azure Container Registry, GitLab Package Registry, Google Artifact Registry, Sonatype Lifecycle
Kimi K2Sonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: Cloudsmith, GitHub Packages
MiniMax M2.5Sonatype Nexus Repository alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, GitHub Packages, Google Artifact Registry, JFrog Artifactory
GPT-6 LunaCloudsmith alternatives: AWS CodeArtifact, JFrog Artifactory, Sonatype Nexus Repository
Muse Glimmer 30BJFrog Artifactory alternatives: Cloudsmith, Sonatype Nexus Repository
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Amazon ECR leads by three points.
Amazon ECR3%#5 of 13
Harbor0%#13 of 13Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Amazon ECR2%#7 of 16
Harbor2%#6 of 16What the models said about Amazon ECR
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“you should still: Ensure they are properly configured and not publicly exposed unless necessary.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative
“AWS workloads: Amazon ECR. It supports image scanning, lifecycle cleanup, and cross-account or cross-region replication.” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Primarily AWS, ECS/EKS/Fargate today → start with Amazon ECR for zero egress pull costs inside AWS and IAM-native access.” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Best default for most mid-sized B2B companies: AWS ECR, ACR, or Artifact Registry depending on your cloud.” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Harbor
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“you should still: Ensure they are properly configured and not publicly exposed unless necessary.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · soft negative
“Cons: High operational overhead. You must patch, scale, and maintain the database and cache.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“or Harbor if you need a self-hosted, open-source solution with enterprise-grade security features” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“or Harbor (if you want open-source flexibility and can manage your own infrastructure)” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Sonatype Nexus Repository Community Edition or Harbor are the best choices” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Sonatype Nexus Repository vs Amazon ECRSonatype Nexus Repository vs HarborJFrog Artifactory vs Amazon ECRJFrog Artifactory vs HarborAmazon ECR vs GitHub PackagesAmazon ECR vs Azure Container RegistryAmazon ECR vs Google Artifact RegistryAmazon ECR vs CloudsmithGitHub Packages vs HarborHarbor vs Azure Container RegistryHarbor vs Google Artifact RegistryHarbor vs CloudsmithAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full artifact registries standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.