Every category where a model named Elastic Observability 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
Observability platforms	IT operations and endpoint	0%	11 of 63	0%	12	accepted challenger
Application performance monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	23 of 70	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 54%
Infrastructure monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	33 of 65	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Site24x7 at 24%
Log management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	51 of 59	100%	1	under 10 labels · led by Datadog Log Management at 20%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Elastic Observability 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 Elastic Observability 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	1	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1	0	2
Mistral Small	2	3	0	5
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	2	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	2	0	2

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

Direct9 labels3

Paraphrase11 labelsNone

Comparative28 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labelsNone

Scale-constrained7 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative59 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 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.

“known for flexibility, scalability, and strong integration with open-source tools” Mistral Small · Observability · comparative prompt · alternative

“Best For: Teams heavily invested in log management and search-based analytics.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Observability · comparative prompt · alternative

“Grafana Cloud or Elastic Observability are excellent alternatives” Mistral Small · Observability · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Open-source roots, full-text search, scalable for logs/metrics/traces” Grok 4.1 Fast · Observability · comparative 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.

“it may be a better fit if you can afford a more feature-rich platform rather than the absolute cheapest option” Perplexity Sonar · Logs · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Elastic Observability, over the 59 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Elastic Observability was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Datadog34 of 5916Not in the top three

Dynatrace33 of 595Not in the top three

New Relic32 of 593Not in the top three

Splunk20 of 594Not in the top three

Datadog Log Management19 of 594Not in the top three

Grafana17 of 592Not in the top three

Better Stack16 of 598Not in the top three

Grafana Loki14 of 591Not in the top three

Grafana Cloud12 of 591Not in the top three

Splunk Observability Cloud12 of 591Not 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 Elastic Observability. 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 50 of the 59 answers that named Elastic Observability and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

toolradar.com33

openobserve.ai24

cubeapm.com18

gartner.com15

newrelic.com12

apistatuscheck.com11

coralogix.com11

cribl.io11

motadata.com10

tinyctl.dev10

155 of the 155 domain citations in answers naming Elastic Observability came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

toolradar.com/best/log-management/for/small-businesses12

toolradar.com/guides/best-observability-platforms10

openobserve.ai/blog/log-management-tools9

cribl.io/resources/comparison-guides/top-10-log-collection-and-analysis-platforms8

cubeapm.com/blog/top-log-management-tools8

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

gartner.com/reviews/market/observability-platforms8

grepr.ai/blog/best-log-management-tools-in-2026-a-realists-buying-guide8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Elastic Observability

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Elastic Observability; a claim can dispute any of them.

Elastic Observability (ELK Stack) 1

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 Elastic Observability'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 Elastic Observability, 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 elastic.co 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.