Every category where a model named Honeybadger 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	0%	6 of 44	10%	30	accepted challenger

Movement

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

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	3	0	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	0	2	0	0	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1	2	0	4
Mistral Small	0	2	0	1	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	2	1	1	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	3	0	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Kimi K2	1	1	1	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	1	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

Direct15 labels3

Paraphrase4 labels1

Comparative18 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained23 labels4

Scale-constrained6 labelsNone

Negative21 labels4not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative87 labels in all, every segment counted; 8 of the 14 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.

“Safer alternatives: Flat-rate like Honeybadger (no overages)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Error monitoring · negative prompt · first choice

“Honeybadger | Flat-fee pricing, indie-friendly, no surprise bills” Kimi K2 · Error monitoring · negative prompt · first choice

“Honeybadger is ideal if you want predictable pricing and don’t mind paying a small monthly fee” Mistral Small · Error monitoring · budget prompt · alternative

“Tools generally considered safe or recommended include ... Honeybadger (for flat-fee billing)” Mistral Small · Error monitoring · 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.

“generally seen as more niche or simpler alternatives compared to Rollbar and Scout” Mistral Small · Error monitoring · direct prompt · soft negative

“it's error-only (no log integration), so avoid if you need correlated traces/logs” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Error monitoring · negative prompt · soft negative

“others like Raygun and Honeybadger can become expensive very quickly” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Error monitoring · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Honeybadger, over the 87 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Honeybadger was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Sentry86 of 8753Not in the top three

Rollbar67 of 874Not in the top three

Bugsnag48 of 870Not in the top three

Datadog40 of 872Not in the top three

GlitchTip38 of 874Not in the top three

New Relic31 of 872Not in the top three

Airbrake23 of 870Not in the top three

Raygun18 of 870Not in the top three

LogRocket17 of 870Not in the top three

Better Stack13 of 870Not 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 Honeybadger. 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 74 of the 87 answers that named Honeybadger and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

scoutapm.com59

rollbar.com44

observeone.com32

worldmetrics.org31

apistatuscheck.com30

raygun.com28

guideflow.com27

inventivehq.com26

radartrek.com23

ones.com22

322 of the 322 domain citations in answers naming Honeybadger came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

scoutapm.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools54

rollbar.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools37

observeone.com/best/error-monitoring-tools32

apistatuscheck.com/blog/best-error-tracking-tools-202630

worldmetrics.org/best/error-monitoring-software29

raygun.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools27

guideflow.com/blog/error-monitoring-software26

inventivehq.com/blog/best-error-tracking-tools-sentry-alternatives26

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Honeybadger

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

Honeybadger/Better 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 Honeybadger'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 Honeybadger, 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 honeybadger.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.