“Hyperconvergence: Cisco, Dell EMC and HPE Exit the Magic Quadrant.”
We reported this development in early 2021. Gartner had just shifted its approach: the era of hardware-centric integrated appliances was over, replaced by software-defined offerings that run on hardware from multiple vendors. Huawei had also felt the consequences of the change. Nutanix and VMware had further distinguished themselves as the two “leaders.”
In 2023, another shift had occurred: the term no longer referred to hyperconvergence, but to distributed hybrid infrastructures. The inclusion criteria for the Magic Quadrant had evolved in parallel. In particular, at least two deployment models had to be covered. On‑prem solutions also needed to be able to run on at least one public cloud. Those offered by cloud service providers had to be capable of running on‑prem and/or at the edge. The ranking of vendors shifted accordingly: Nutanix and VMware were joined in the “leaders” by AWS, Microsoft, and Oracle.
This approach remains valid two years on. The mandatory core functionality remains limited (hypervisor, storage, virtualized networking, API-driven management and a centralized portal). It includes VM support, which effectively excludes container infrastructures — which have their own Magic Quadrant.
10 providers, 5 “leaders”
The “leaders” from last year remain so. Namely, AWS, Broadcom (VMware), Microsoft, Nutanix and Oracle. A new entrant appears: Google, with its Google Distributed Cloud (GDC) offering. Red Hat and SUSE retain their “honorable mention.”
On the axis of “execution,” intended to reflect the ability to meet market demand effectively, the situation stands as follows:
| Rank | Vendor | Year-over-year Change |
| 1 | AWS | +1 |
| 2 | Broadcom (VMware) | +2 |
| 3 | Nutanix | = |
| 4 | Microsoft | -3 |
| 5 | Oracle | = |
| 6 | IBM | = |
| 7 | new entrant | |
| 8 | Alibaba Cloud | -1 |
| 9 | Huawei | -1 |
| 10 | Tencent Cloud | -1 |
On the axis of “vision,” which reflects the strategies (commercial, marketing, sectoral, product…):
| Rank | Vendor | Year-over-year Change |
| 1 | Oracle | +2 |
| 2 | Microsoft | -1 |
| 3 | AWS | -1 |
| 4 | Nutanix | +1 |
| 5 | new entrant | |
| 6 | Broadcom (VMware) | -2 |
| 7 | IBM | -1 |
| 8 | Alibaba Cloud | -1 |
| 9 | Huawei | -1 |
| 10 | Tencent Cloud | -1 |
AWS, Struggling to Build Notoriety Beyond Its Customer Base
Last year, Gartner had highlighted AWS’s leadership position in the public cloud, the quality of its support, and the ease of use of its Outposts offering (also praised for its integrations with on‑prem technologies). This year, Gartner notes that the U.S. group has been selected for large deployments across several geographic regions (Europe is not mentioned). Another strength: the ability to cover a broad range of use cases through Local Zones (and their dedicated variant), Outposts, Snowball and container services (hybrid EKS nodes; ECS and EKS Anywhere). Also a plus for the fully managed aspect.
In 2024, Gartner had pointed to a lack of AWS service awareness among buyers who were not already customers. It had also lamented the absence of an offline mode for Outposts, whose development could be tricky. Another area of concern: the lack of feature parity between Outposts and the Snow family compared with the public cloud. The remark about awareness beyond AWS customers remains valid. If the situation has improved for Outposts (it can now run for seven days in offline mode), the capabilities remain limited when not connected to a cloud region. Gartner adds the absence of an SLA, observed likewise for Snow.
The Support Experience Remains Problematic at Broadcom
Last year, Broadcom stood out for its large VMware-installed base, its “single HCI product” and the breadth of its partner integrations. This year, Gartner emphasizes the depth of VMware expertise available. As well as the maturity of the VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF), and its traction in hybrid cloud, aided by license portability and agreements with multiple CSPs, both on‑prem and at hyperscale.
The move of VMware into Broadcom’s fold had been associated with a decline in support quality, Gartner noted last year. The firm had added the distrust surrounding the brand, even more so given the restructuring of the product catalog. This point remains valid. Added to this is a growing number of organizations reporting negative experiences with sales/support. Another weakness: the lack of advanced services for unstructured data, at least compared with the other leaders.
What Persisted: Complexities at Microsoft
Last year, Microsoft was credited with strong historical performance in this market, its “unique offering” and the quality of its unified management (the extent of Azure’s control plane extending beyond the cloud). The unified management remains a strong point. Microsoft also benefits from brand recognition, the advantage of familiarity with its offerings for those already on Azure… and licensing viewed as attractive across many sectors.
Azure Stack HCI (the former name of Azure Local) is rarely considered for edge-only scenarios, Gartner noted last year. It also highlighted administration complexity (several tools involved, including across generations) and Microsoft’s security improvement potential. This time, Azure Local is pointed to for its limited offline operation (three days). The note on administration complexity becomes a note on the challenge of assembling a unified solution. Gartner adds reports of instability after installation. And the lack of coverage for certain use cases, including large on-prem deployments.
With Nutanix, Perceived Higher Price and Risk
Last year, Nutanix was praised for the ease of use of its NCP solution (the ability to manage multiple hypervisors, in particular). Gartner also appreciated license portability and the company’s ability to capitalize on its position in HCI. This time, instead of ease of use, Gartner highlights the breadth of the offering and its level of unification, which avoids the complexities of integration. Positive notes also on operational consistency across environments and data services (snapshots, DR, encryption).
In 2024, Gartner had drawn attention to Nutanix’s heterogeneous licensing (pay-as-you-go not available across the portfolio). The offering is not native to the public cloud, he added. This year, the firm notes a lack of traction among cloud-first buyers. Its pricing remains perceived as high. Moreover, Nutanix is smaller than the other leaders—and some buyers shy away for that reason.
Beyond Exadata Footprint, Oracle’s Brand Struggles to Gain Notoriety
Last year, Oracle stood out for its multi-cloud approach (integration of OCI services with AWS, Google and Microsoft, plus direct interconnections). Likewise, the variety of deployment options for its offerings remained a point. The multi-cloud aspect remains valid. The same goes for deployment options, but Gartner notes them in terms of sovereignty possibilities. The firm also adds the RDMA networking suited to AI workloads.
The Compute Cloud@Customer offering rarely appears on shortlists, except for customers who already use Exadata, Gartner noted last year. The firm had also explained that Oracle’s AI infrastructure was not yet well differentiated, despite specific capabilities notably in GPU clustering. This time, on the AI front, Gartner points to the absence of a native GenAI model. It adds the lack of Oracle’s brand recognition in this market, except for those already invested in Exadata. Another point, raised in other Magic Quadrants as well: the “loss of trust” caused by security incident handling that occurred earlier in 2025 on Oracle Cloud Classic.
For complementary reading, consult the Magic Quadrant for Public Cloud Infrastructure (IaaS + PaaS) and the one for PaaS. AWS, Google, Microsoft and Oracle are leaders in the former. Alibaba Cloud, AWS, Google, Microsoft, Red Hat and Salesforce are leaders in the latter.
