Every category where a model named Cribl 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
Log management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	16 of 59	0%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Cribl 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 Cribl across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	1	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	2	2
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	1
Kimi K2	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1	2
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1

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

Direct6 labels1

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained5 labelsNone

Negative6 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative28 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 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.

“If you want to optimize costs: Use Cribl to manage the data flow.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Logs · comparative prompt · alternative

“Object-storage-backed tools (e.g., Parseable, OpenObserve, Cribl)” Kimi K2 · Logs · negative prompt · alternative

“Implement a pipeline tool like Cribl or Mezmo immediately” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Logs · comparative prompt · alternative

“Cribl (pipeline control and routing)” MiniMax M2.5 · Logs · scale 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Cribl, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cribl was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Splunk24 of 287Not in the top three

Datadog Log Management24 of 284Not in the top three

Elastic Stack19 of 282Not in the top three

Grafana Loki14 of 280Not in the top three

Dynatrace11 of 280Not in the top three

Graylog9 of 280Not in the top three

New Relic Logs8 of 280Not in the top three

OpenObserve7 of 280Not in the top three

Sumo Logic7 of 280Not in the top three

Coralogix6 of 280Not 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 Cribl. 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 26 of the 28 answers that named Cribl and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cribl.ioYour site26

openobserve.ai12

cubeapm.com10

dash0.com10

exabeam.com10

middleware.io10

toolradar.com10

learn.g2.com9

coralogix.com7

expertinsights.com7

Eighty-five of the 111 domain citations in answers naming Cribl came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cribl.io/resources/comparison-guides/top-10-log-collection-and-analysis-platforms22

cubeapm.com/blog/top-log-management-tools10

exabeam.com/explainers/log-management/top-6-log-management-tools-and-how-to-choose10

learn.g2.com/best-log-monitoring-software9

middleware.io/blog/log-monitoring-tools9

openobserve.ai/blog/log-management-tools9

cribl.io/resources/comparison-guides/top-log-monitoring-tools-a-comprehensive-comparison8

dash0.com/comparisons/best-log-management-tools8

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 Cribl'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 Cribl, 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 cribl.io 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.