Gane Index
All indexesEvery index and its categoriesGTMMarketing, sales, customer and revenue operations softwareITSecurity, IT operations, cloud, developer and data softwareHRHR, payroll, recruiting, performance and learning softwareFinanceAccounting, planning, spend, billing and treasury software
Claim your listing
Index › IT › Data platform › NoSQL › MongoDB vs Apache Cassandra
NoSQL databases · November 2026 Edition

MongoDB vs Apache Cassandra

Fourteen of fourteen models named MongoDB first on the direct prompt; zero named Apache Cassandra. Both were named by all fourteen models and MongoDB carries 82 labels and Apache Cassandra 54, so the shares are not directly comparable.

MongoDB

endorsed leader

Named in three categories this edition.

Apache Cassandra

criticized challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

First-choice share74%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate11%31%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#5A position in a field of 14; printed, not drawn.
Labels8254A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, MongoDB reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Amazon DynamoDB was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. MongoDB vs Amazon DynamoDB · MongoDB vs PostgreSQL · MongoDB vs Redis

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 nosql databases page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
MongoDBFirst choices, of fourteen modelsApache Cassandra
Direct140
Paraphrase130
Comparative60
Budget-constrained1111 against MongoDB · 5 against Apache Cassandra
Scale-constrained301 against Apache Cassandra
Negative008 against MongoDB · 11 against Apache Cassandra
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, MongoDB and Apache Cassandra were named in the same answer 147 times, of the 243 answers naming MongoDB and the 163 naming Apache Cassandra. In those answers Apache Cassandra took the first choice two times and MongoDB seventy-nine.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where MongoDB and Apache Cassandra stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.20
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
MongoDB Apache Cassandra first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, MongoDB on the left and Apache Cassandra on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where MongoDB and Apache Cassandra stood in it.

MongoDB first, Apache Cassandra an alternative

14 of 14 modelsApache Cassandra was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Amazon DynamoDB, MongoDB alternatives: Firebase, Redis
GPT-5.4 miniAmazon DynamoDB, MongoDB alternatives: Azure Cosmos DB
Gemini 3.5 FlashMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Azure Cosmos DB, Couchbase, Neo4j, Redis
Perplexity SonarMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Apache Cassandra, Azure Cosmos DB, Couchbase, Neo4j, ScyllaDB
Grok 4.20MongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Apache Cassandra, Couchbase, Elasticsearch
Mistral SmallMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB
DeepSeek V4 FlashMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Apache Cassandra, Couchbase, DataStax
Llama 4 MaverickMongoDB
Qwen 3.7 FlashMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, PostgreSQL
Kimi K2MongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Apache Cassandra, Couchbase, Redis
GLM 4.7 FlashXMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Apache Cassandra, Azure Cosmos DB, Couchbase
MiniMax M2.5MongoDB alternatives: Apache Cassandra, Elasticsearch, Neo4j
GPT-6 LunaMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB, Couchbase
Muse Glimmer 30BMongoDB alternatives: Amazon DynamoDB

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
MongoDB leads by eighty-one points.
MongoDB81%#1 of 12
Apache Cassandra0%#12 of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
MongoDB leads by seventy-two points.
MongoDB74%#1 of 14
Apache Cassandra2%#5 of 14
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
MongoDB leads by forty-nine points.
MongoDB53%#1 of 14
Apache Cassandra3%#5 of 14
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about MongoDB

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Avoid MongoDB if you need multi-document ACID transactions” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“MongoDB: Do not casually trust deployment defaults... choose read and write concerns deliberately, define schemas in application code” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“over managed cloud services like MongoDB Atlas, DynamoDB, or Cosmos DB — the latter can incur unexpected costs” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · soft negative
“MongoDB Atlas is the default first choice for mid-market B2B because of flexible document model, strong developer experience and multi-cloud portability.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“MongoDB remains one of the most popular document-based NoSQL databases, offering scalability, flexibility, and strong indexing capabilities.” Muse Glimmer 30B · comparative prompt · first choice
“MongoDB Atlas is a strong default for mid-sized B2B use cases such as CRM pipelines, customer profiles, product catalogs and content feeds” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice

What the models said about Apache Cassandra

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Verdict: Avoid unless you have a team of Cassandra specialists and a use case that truly demands it.” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Apache Cassandra unless you expect millions of users immediately.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Cassandra if you lack DevOps expertise for tuning.” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Absolute $0 software + you control infra: Apache Cassandra or CouchDB for wide-column / key-value” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“Cassandra or Couchbase may be better long-term bets—though they require more operational investment” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · alternative
“Best for High-Volume Writes & Scaling... Consideration: Steeper learning curve and more complex operations” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · alternative
Also compared
MongoDB vs Amazon DynamoDBMongoDB vs PostgreSQLMongoDB vs RedisMongoDB vs Azure Cosmos DBMongoDB vs Apache CouchDBAmazon DynamoDB vs Apache CassandraPostgreSQL vs Apache CassandraRedis vs Apache CassandraApache Cassandra vs Azure Cosmos DBApache Cassandra vs Apache CouchDBAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full nosql 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.