GitHub Actions is a CI/CD and workflow automation platform from GitHub · github.com ↗
The standing depends on who is buying. Every model is asked the same questions for each company size.
Ranked first. Next is GitLab CI/CD at 8%.
Ranked first. Next is GitLab CI/CD at 30%. 12 of 14 models made it the first choice when asked directly.
GitLab CI/CD is first at 54%.
“the safer default is the CI/CD system integrated with the existing source-control platform—such as GitHub Actions, GitLab CI/CD, or Bitbucket Pipelines”Perplexity Sonar · Negative question · first choice
“For 80% of mid-market B2B software companies, GitHub Actions (if on GitHub) or GitLab CI/CD (if on GitLab) provides the best balance”Gemini 3.5 Flash · Direct question · first choice
“If you host your code on GitHub: Start with GitHub Actions. It reduces context switching and requires zero external hosting management.”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Comparative question · first choice
“The best CI/CD platform for a company with a limited budget is GitHub Actions, as it is the clear leader with 68% of first choices”Llama 4 Maverick · Budget-constrained question · first choice
“GitHub Actions as your only delivery path, if outages would stop critical releases... That doesn't make Actions a bad choice”GPT-6 Luna · Negative question · warning
“GitHub Actions — supply-chain caution ... treat workflow logs, secrets handling and third-party actions as high-risk.”Muse Glimmer 30B · Negative question · warning
“great for GitHub, but beware of credential leakage in public repos and costs on large private repos”DeepSeek V4 Flash · Negative question · warning
“Be Cautious About Costs & Stability ... Use with a strict budget cap; monitor for sudden policy shifts.”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Negative question · warning
The products named in the same answers as GitHub Actions, over the 228 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 215 | 30 | Compare → | |
| 180 | 0 | View → | |
| 170 | 3 | View → | |
| 76 | 4 | View → | |
| 68 | 1 | View → | |
| 54 | 1 | View → | |
| 51 | 0 | View → | |
| 35 | 0 | View → | |
| 35 | 0 | View → | |
| 33 | 0 | View → |
What the models named instead of GitHub Actions →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
Stated on GitHub Actions's own site, not checked by Gane.
Fourteen AI models from 12 labs are asked the same buying questions six ways, for three company sizes. Standings refresh every edition.
Gane sells AI visibility software. No company can pay to change a result.
Read the method →Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted. These counts come from 181 of the 228 answers that named GitHub Actions and are not a share of its labels.
380 of the 466 domain citations in answers naming GitHub Actions came from a third party's page. Forty-one were to the publisher's own pages (the Gane Index), which the models cite like any other source; they are not counted as a third party.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Warning | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Grok 4.20 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Mistral Small | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Kimi K2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6 |