Upstash
Serverless Redis and Kafka
JS/TS
—
Overall Rank
Not in top 20
0%
Pick Rate
0 of 77 (CI: 0–4.8%)
0
Primary Picks
of 77 extractable
5
Alt Picks
also mentioned 7x
Competitive
Category Tier
41.6% winner dominance
In Caching
Full comparison →Redis32/77 (41.6%) CI: 31.2–52.7%
Custom/DIY15/77 (19.5%) CI: 12.2–29.7%
Next.js Cache15/77 (19.5%) CI: 12.2–29.7%
By Model
Sonnet 4.5
0%
avg across repos
Opus 4.5
0%
avg across repos
Opus 4.6
23.1%
avg across repos
Per-Repo Breakdown
| Repo | Stack | Sonnet | Opus 4.5 | Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
TaskFlowJS/TS | Next.js 14, TypeScript, App Router | — | — | 23.1% |
Key Insight
Fragmented by stack: Next.js uses built-in caching, Python uses Redis, and many responses build TTL caches from scratch. Stack-specific caching strategies dominate.
Model Disagreement
A genuine cross-language disagreement. Sonnet picks Redis at 71%. By Opus 4.6, Custom/DIY leads and Redis falls to 18%. Within JS, Next.js Cache also rises. Redis share across models: 71% → 31% → 18%.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Does Claude Code recommend Upstash?
- Upstash appears in 0% of Caching responses. The category leader is Redis at 41.6%.
- What caching tool does Claude Code prefer?
- Redis leads at 41.6%. The category is classified as "Competitive" (<50% dominance). Other options include Custom/DIY (19.5%) and Next.js Cache (19.5%).
- How do different Claude models compare on Upstash?
- Across repos, Sonnet 4.5 averages 0%, Opus 4.5 averages 0%, and Opus 4.6 averages 23.1% for Upstash. Models disagree on this category: A genuine cross-language disagreement. Sonnet picks Redis at 71%. By Opus 4.6, Custom/DIY leads and Redis falls to 18%. ...