There may be more than one plant sold under that name, but the fact that it is a hybrid (even a hybrid of hybrids) does not mean it should be variable. A named hybrid should be a clone, a single unique set of DNA. All vegetative propagations of that named hybrid (which are genetically identical) retain the name and look the same. Anything that came from a different seed (even if it was from the same parents) should have a different name. Anything that came from self-pollination of the hybrid (or open pollination in the case it's not self-compatible) should have a different name.
I realize some people are more creative with their use of names, but I try to stick to these rules when it comes to the database. Some hybrid cultivars are so old that they have had time to mutate and generate distinct versions of themselves (eg. variegates), but this is a very different plant from the other one and I have a hard time imagining it is a sport. So I would prefer to file this image under the genus entry. If you would like to label it with a caption suiting your preferences, please be my guest.
Some aloe names have been treated carelessly over the years. For example 'Doran Black' (a Dick Wright bumpy hybrid which has been used to generate several other hybrids) was bred with its siblings and supposedly identical plants were generated, which was supposed to be a cool feature and touted as something interesting and useful. But then over time people started having a "large clone" of DB, or a "bumpier clone" of DB, and in the end the meaning/specificity of the name was degraded. At this point very few people know what the "original" DB actually looked like.
