Every category where a model named AppSignal 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
Error and crash monitoring	Developer platform	0%	27 of 44	50%	4	under 10 labels · led by Sentry at 82%
Application performance monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	29 of 70	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 54%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for AppSignal yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated AppSignal across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0

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

Direct4 labelsNone

Paraphrase4 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative13 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative32 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“Safer alternatives: Flat-rate like Honeybadger (no overages), AppSignal” Grok 4.1 Fast · Error monitoring · negative prompt · alternative

“AppSignal (Best for Zero Pricing Surprises)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · APM · budget 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.

“Great for Ruby/Elixir, but be cautious if you need log retention beyond 5 days without add-on fees” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Error monitoring · negative prompt · soft negative

“AppSignal is not recommended for teams that need log retention beyond 5 days without add-on fees.” Llama 4 Maverick · Error monitoring · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as AppSignal, over the 32 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and AppSignal was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

New Relic29 of 328Not in the top three

Datadog28 of 325Not in the top three

Sentry25 of 328Not in the top three

Scout APM13 of 325Not in the top three

Honeybadger12 of 321Not in the top three

Dynatrace10 of 321Not in the top three

Rollbar9 of 320Not in the top three

LogRocket8 of 320Not in the top three

Bugsnag7 of 320Not in the top three

SigNoz7 of 320Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 AppSignal. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 25 of the 32 answers that named AppSignal and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

scoutapm.com20

g2.com15

rollbar.com14

cubeapm.com11

openobserve.ai11

newrelic.com10

apistatuscheck.com9

guideflow.com9

smallbusinesscomputing.com9

instatus.com7

115 of the 115 domain citations in answers naming AppSignal came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

g2.com/discussions/best-rated-apm-software-providers-for-small-tech-businesses10

scoutapm.com/blog/best-apm-for-small-teams-202610

scoutapm.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools10

g2.com/categories/application-performance-monitoring-apm/small-business9

openobserve.ai/blog/top-10-apm-tools9

rollbar.com/blog/best-apm-tools9

smallbusinesscomputing.com/guides/top-apm-tools9

apistatuscheck.com/blog/best-error-tracking-tools-20268

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 AppSignal'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 AppSignal, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at appsignal.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.