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 26 → 18 of 58
2 categories · Named, not rankedCubeAPM
27Judge labels
5First choices
0Negative labels
11 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
3 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. CubeAPM was named 3 times in APM and 1 other category, where New Relic led with 46%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business18 of 60
0%7 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market23 of 66
0%2 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise5 of 59
9%7 labels
under the label threshold
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 CubeAPM 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% | 23 of 66 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 46% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Error and crash monitoring | Developer platform | 0% | 24 of 42 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Sentry at 76% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, CubeAPM held within the floor in all two 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 18 → 23 of 60
Enterprise▼−1Since September 2026: 9% → 8%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
8%from 9% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 4 → 5 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 18 → 23 of 66 |
| Error 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 15 → 24 of 42 |
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 CubeAPM 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 CubeAPM 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 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 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
Direct5 labelsNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative4 labels1not counted in share
Budget-constrained14 labels5
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative3 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative27 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 6 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.
“CubeAPM is a strong candidate because it is positioned as the lowest-cost option at small scale” Perplexity Sonar · APM · budget prompt · alternative
“Best for cost-sensitive teams and data sovereignty.” Llama 4 Maverick · APM · negative 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 CubeAPM, over the 27 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CubeAPM was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as CubeAPM, over the 27 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and CubeAPM 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 CubeAPM. 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 27 of the 27 answers that named CubeAPM and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cubeapm.comYour site22
middleware.io17
g2.com11
guideflow.com10
motadata.com9
newrelic.com8
coralogix.com7
manageengine.com7
uptrace.dev7
instatus.com6
Eighty-two of the 104 domain citations in answers naming CubeAPM came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
cubeapm.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, CubeAPM takes 0% of first choices and New Relic takes 46%.ShowHide
Search and answers
cubeapm.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, CubeAPM 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
- 40 a month (“cubeapm”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 0 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 846 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 1,093 · 3 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 409
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 23 of 66 in APM
Segment leader
46%
New Relic
- First choices
- 5 across its categories
- Named in
- 27 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 27 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 cubeapm.com
1,054
subdomains included
Content
782
counted in the table below
Documentation
225
Product · Integration
7 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 492 | 39 | 2026-08-19 | APM, Observability | |
| Comparison | 255 | 27 | 2026-07-20 | APM, Infra monitoring | |
| Template or tool | 14 | 0 | 2026-03-30 | Observability | |
| Glossary or explainer | 13 | 0 | 2026-05-18 | Infra monitoring, APM | |
| Case study | 7 | 0 | 2026-03-23 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 1 | 1 | 2026-07-01 |
Most recent
- 2026-08-19Sap monitoring complete guide blog
- 2026-08-19Log retention costs reduce storage bills blog
- 2026-08-19Log retention best practices blog
- 2026-08-19Canary deployment monitoring guide blog
- 2026-08-19Monitoring embedding driven search rag pipelines blog
- 2026-08-19Sap hana monitoring key metrics tools setup guide blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page cubeapm.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.
Follow CubeAPM
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.
The company
CubeAPM is its own company.ShowHide
The company
CubeAPM is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Best Observability & APM Platform; a full-stack observability and APM platform; managed observability, inside your cloud.
- For
- startups, SaaS companies and others; modern cloud teams
- Price stated
- $0.20/GB flat cubeapm.com
- Starting price
- $0.20/GB cubeapm.com
- Free plan or trial
- Try Sandbox cubeapm.com
- Integrations claimed
- 800 cubeapm.com/integrations
- Certifications
- SOC 2ISO 27001
- Customers named
- DelhiveryMamaearthredBusCashifybharatpeolacleartrippolicybazaar
- Not stated on the pages read
- Hosting
What CubeAPM's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: cubeapm.com, cubeapm.com/pricing, cubeapm.com/platform, cubeapm.com/customers, cubeapm.com/integrations. A claimed page can correct any of 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 CubeAPM'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 CubeAPM, 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 CubeAPM by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where CubeAPM 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 CubeAPM, 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.