Do coding agents recommend Cloudflare AI Gateway?
Cloudflare AI Gateway was chosen in 23% of 329 judged AI gateways sessions, ranking second.
Cloudflare AI Gateway was chosen in 23% of 329 judged AI gateways sessions, ranking second. It was also raised as a candidate in 160 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in AI gateways inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Cloudflare AI Gateway. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | AI gateways |
| Sessions in the category | 329 |
| Sessions where Cloudflare AI Gateway was chosen | 76 |
| Install share | 23% |
| Rank in category | 2 of 9 |
| Codebases it won in | 8 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 160 |
| Chosen when considered | 32% |
| Site | cloudflare.com |
By agent
The agents treat Cloudflare AI Gateway very differently. Codex chose it in 38% of its sessions in this category and Cursor in 7%, a spread of 31 points. Grok Build CLI ran fewer than 30 sessions here, too few to compare.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Cloudflare AI Gateway | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 69 | 19 | 28% |
| Codex | 96 | 36 | 38% |
| Cursor | 71 | 5 | 7% |
| Grok Build CLI | 24 | 5 | 21% |
| Muse Code | 69 | 11 | 16% |
A single blended install share would report the midpoint and hide both ends. If most of your users run Cursor, your real position here is 7%, not 23%.
By who was asking
Cloudflare AI Gateway performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 21% to 33%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 24 of the 31 categories we measured.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Cloudflare AI Gateway | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 40 | 13 | 33% |
| Junior developer | 81 | 17 | 21% |
| Senior engineer | 126 | 27 | 21% |
| Enterprise team | 82 | 19 | 23% |
What Cloudflare AI Gateway was up against
The full ranking in AI gateways, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Portkey | 86 | 26% |
| 2 | Cloudflare AI Gateway (this page) | 76 | 23% |
| 3 | Vercel AI Gateway | 52 | 16% |
| 4 | OpenRouter | 49 | 15% |
| 5 | LiteLLM | 25 | 8% |
| 6 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 15 | 5% |
| 7 | Amazon Bedrock | 14 | 4% |
| 8 | Helicone | 1 | 0% |
What this means
A solid second or third position in a category means the agent is genuinely choosing rather than reaching automatically. That is a winnable position, because the inputs it uses can be changed.
The fastest gains are usually in the sessions that were nearly won: read them, find the step where the agent moved on, and fix that step.
Where these numbers come from
The 329 sessions in AI gateways are part of a published set of 15,287, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every AI gateways run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Cloudflare AI Gateway: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.
<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->
Common questions
Do coding agents recommend Cloudflare AI Gateway?
Yes. Cloudflare AI Gateway was chosen in 76 of the 329 judged sessions in AI gateways, a 23% install share, ranking second in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Cloudflare AI Gateway?
In 19 of the 69 sessions in AI gateways run with Claude Code, which is 28%.
Do different coding agents treat Cloudflare AI Gateway differently?
Yes, and by a wide margin. Codex chose it in 38% of its runs and Cursor in 7%.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 110 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.
How often is Cloudflare AI Gateway considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 160 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 76. That is a 32% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 15,287 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code inside 110 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.