Every one of them, best first

How to read these figures

The colour says what a bar IS, not how it scores: the accent is the one this page is about, grey is everything it is compared with, and the hollow bar is the web overall — the ruler, not a rival. Whether a figure is above or below the rest of the web is in the number and in the arrow beside it.

Every figure here comes from a sample, not from counting every site — so it carries a margin: how much it could move if we had happened to sample different pages. A figure measured on a thousand pages has a wide margin; one measured on a hundred thousand has a narrow one. It matters for one thing: two figures that differ by less than the wider of their margins are not one above the other, they are tied. That is why nothing here has a position number.

Every technology in this category the census can publish a figure for, including the ones above. A technology is here when it has all four dimensions and enough sample to publish; a technology that belongs to two categories is in both.

TechnologyAWCSMonth by month
Elasticsearch

Elasticsearch

Sample
n=209
Coverage
98.6%
Margin
±3.67
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±3.67 are tied, not ranked.

Elasticsearch scores 36.0%36.0%
Elasticsearch: 5 months, up▲ +14.0
Algolia

Algolia

Sample
n=255
Coverage
97.3%
Margin
±3.32
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±3.32 are tied, not ranked.

Algolia scores 17.7%17.7%
Algolia: 5 months, no significant change= +2.8
Awesomplete

Awesomplete

Sample
n=105
Coverage
93.8%
Margin
±5.17
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±5.17 are tied, not ranked.

Awesomplete scores 14.9%14.9%
Awesomplete: 4 months, no significant change= +3.6
Doofinder

Doofinder

Sample
n=113
Coverage
99.1%
Margin
±4.99
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±4.99 are tied, not ranked.

Doofinder scores 13.9%13.9%
Doofinder: 5 months, no significant change= +1.0