| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIOps platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 38 of 93 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 17% |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Always prioritize Explainable AI or platform architectures that clearly display the underlying topology and reasoning (such as Dynatrace's Davis causal AI” Gemini 3.5 Flash · AIOps · negative prompt · alternative
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.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 1 of the 1 answers that named Dynatrace's Davis causal AI and are not a share of its labels.
No domain is on file for Dynatrace's Davis causal AI, so its own site is not marked.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
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.
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 Dynatrace's Davis causal AI'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 Dynatrace's Davis causal AI, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Dynatrace's Davis causal AI by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: