Every category where a model named GlitchTip 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	2%	3 of 44	0%	14	accepted challenger

Movement

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

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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained22 labels3

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative14 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative47 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 4 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.

“"We want $0 spend and have a cheap server" | GlitchTip | Point your code to it using Sentry SDKs; absolute control over costs.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Error monitoring · budget prompt · first choice

“Look at GlitchTip (an open-source, lightweight alternative compatible with Sentry's SDKs)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Error monitoring · negative prompt · first choice

“Open-source Sentry clone, no vendor lock-in... Top for ultra-low budgets avoiding any SaaS fees.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Error monitoring · budget prompt · alternative

“If you need to self-host due to privacy or data residency: Go with Glitchtip or Bugsink” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Error monitoring · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as GlitchTip, over the 47 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GlitchTip was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Sentry47 of 4726Compare →

Rollbar40 of 472Compare →

Honeybadger38 of 477Not in the top three

Bugsnag30 of 471Not in the top three

Datadog18 of 470Not in the top three

New Relic15 of 470Not in the top three

Bugsink11 of 470Not in the top three

Raygun9 of 470Not in the top three

LogRocket8 of 470Not in the top three

PostHog8 of 470Not 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 GlitchTip. 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 35 of the 47 answers that named GlitchTip and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

scoutapm.com27

rollbar.com22

observeone.com19

inventivehq.com17

apistatuscheck.com16

monoscope.tech15

shotmark.dev13

guideflow.com12

raygun.com12

costbench.com11

164 of the 164 domain citations in answers naming GlitchTip came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

scoutapm.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools25

observeone.com/best/error-monitoring-tools19

rollbar.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools19

inventivehq.com/blog/best-error-tracking-tools-sentry-alternatives17

apistatuscheck.com/blog/best-error-tracking-tools-202616

monoscope.tech/blog/error-monitoring-tools-for-small-businesses-under-budget15

shotmark.dev/blog/error-monitoring/error-monitoring-for-small-teams-on-a-budget13

raygun.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools12

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as GlitchTip

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

Glitchtip 4

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 GlitchTip'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 GlitchTip, 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 glitchtip.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.