Small business=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 53 → 57 of 58
5 categories · RankedAppDynamics
158Judge labels
4First choices
66Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
5Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
9% in APM for enterprise buyers
Rank 13 of 66 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 27% of its 37 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of AppDynamics →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business59 of 60
0%25 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market13 of 66
0%37 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise4 of 59
9%49 labels
accepted challenger
In apm · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named AppDynamics for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Application performance monitoring | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 13 of 66 | 27% | 37 | criticized challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Observability platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 79 of 80 | 83% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Grafana at 27% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AIOps platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 75 of 93 | 50% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 17% | |
| Infrastructure monitoring | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 61 of 79 | 100% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Datadog at 28% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Network monitoring and management | Network and edge | 0% | 29 of 78 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Auvik at 26% |
Movement
Since September 2026, AppDynamics held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · APM · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 15 → 13 of 60
Enterprise▲+8Since September 2026: 2% → 10%, +8 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
10%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 3 pointsRank 5 → 4 of 57
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| APM | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 15 → 13 of 66 |
| Observability | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 39 → 79 of 80 |
| AIOps | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 75 of 93, unchanged |
| Infra monitoring | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 45 → 61 of 79 |
| Network monitoring | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 29 of 78, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated AppDynamics across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated AppDynamics across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct17 labels2
Paraphrase21 labels1
Comparative42 labelsNone
Budget-constrained12 labels1
Scale-constrained13 labelsNone
Negative53 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative158 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 4 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Choose AppDynamics if you're in a more traditional enterprise stack and care about business transaction monitoring.” GPT-5.4 mini · APM · comparative prompt · alternative
“AppDynamics has always excelled at linking technical application performance directly to business outcomes.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · APM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best For: Large enterprises, especially those with legacy Java/.NET applications or Oracle databases.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · APM · comparative prompt · alternative
“Best for mid-market IT teams running applications and infrastructure from a single on-premises console” Mistral Small · APM · direct prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“Teams on perpetual licenses, Rapid Start SKUs and older agents are being actively sunset. If you are evaluating a "new" AppDynamics deployment in 2026 you are effectively buying into Splunk's portfolio roadmap” Muse Glimmer 30B · APM · negative prompt · hard negative
“The Legacy Heavyweights | AppDynamics, CA APM | Teams wanting modern cloud-native flexibility and speed.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · APM · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid for Mid-Sized B2B ... Powerful but heavy, expensive, and better suited to large enterprises” DeepSeek V4 Flash · APM · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Licensing is often tied to "Business Transactions" (BTs), which can be hard to predict and can escalate cost-of-ownership.” MiniMax M2.5 · Observability · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AppDynamics, over the 156 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AppDynamics was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as AppDynamics, over the 156 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AppDynamics was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named AppDynamics. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 136 of the 156 answers that named AppDynamics and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
motadata.com82
newrelic.com69
g2.com63
middleware.io59
manageengine.com49
uptrace.dev39
learn.g2.com34
cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com32
dotcom-monitor.com31
cubeapm.com30
488 of the 488 domain citations in answers naming AppDynamics came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
splunk.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, AppDynamics takes 0% of first choices and New Relic takes 46%.ShowHide
Search and answers
splunk.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, AppDynamics takes 0% of first choices and New Relic takes 46%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “apm tool”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “apm tools”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 2,900 a month (“appdynamics”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 211 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 892,906 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 58,364 · 6,154 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 32,642
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 13 of 66 in APM
Segment leader
46%
New Relic
- First choices
- 4 across its categories
- Named in
- 156 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 136 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on splunk.com
10,725
subdomains included
Content
4,642
counted in the table below
Documentation
3
Product · Integration
152 · 20
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 2,939 | 8 | 2026-09-17 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 718 | 9 | 2026-09-23 | ||
| Podcast or video | 357 | 5 | 2026-09-24 | ||
| Case study | 241 | 0 | 2021-01-01 | ||
| News or press | 199 | 0 | 2025-11-20 | ||
| Comparison | 81 | 2 | 2026-09-11 | ||
| Conference or event | 58 | 0 | 2026-06-15 | ||
| Report or ebook | 28 | 0 | 2024-12-10 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 13 | 0 | 2024-06-03 | ||
| Template or tool | 8 | 0 | 2025-09-08 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-24Seamless security realized how splunk and aws enable machine speed threat mitigation through unified telemetry podcast or video
- 2026-09-23Openai swarm framework glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-23Splunk aws building the agentic enterprise together podcast or video
- 2026-09-23From alert fatigue to action native security hub findings in splunk podcast or video
- 2026-09-22Agent frameworks glossary or explainer
- 2026-09-22Agent performance metrics glossary or explainer
Events in person
Last twelve months
- April 8, 2026GovSummit 2026Washington D.C. · took part
- March 31, 2026 to April 2, 2026Forum INCYBER Europe 2026Lille, France · attended
As the event pages on splunk.com state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page splunk.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as AppDynamics
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as AppDynamics; a claim can dispute any of them.
AppDynamics (Cisco) 10Splunk AppDynamics 9AppDynamics (Cisco/Splunk) 2AppDynamics (Splunk) 1AppDynamics (by Cisco) 1AppDynamics (now Splunk Observability Cloud) 1AppDynamics/Cisco 1Appdynamics (Cisco) 1Cisco AppDynamics 1Splunk (Cisco) / AppDynamics 1Splunk AppDynamics / AppDynamics legacy 1
Follow AppDynamics
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when AppDynamics's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as AppDynamics, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for AppDynamics by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where AppDynamics is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name AppDynamics, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.