Jaeger
59Judge labels
1First choices
18Negative labels
12 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
2% in Telemetry pipelines for mid-market buyers
Rank 11 of 124 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 10% of its 10 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Jaeger →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business34 of 103
0%9 labels
under the label threshold
Mid-market11 of 124
2%10 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprisenot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
In telemetry pipelines · 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 Jaeger 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Telemetry pipelines | IT operations and endpoint | 2% | 11 of 124 | 10% | 10 | accepted challenger | |
| Application performance monitoring | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 17 of 66 | 18% | 11 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Observability platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 20 of 80 | 14% | 7 | under 10 labels · led by Grafana at 27% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Infrastructure monitoring | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 46 of 79 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Datadog at 28% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Jaeger yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.
By model
How each model treated Jaeger 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 Jaeger 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 0 | 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
Direct4 labelsNone
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative11 labelsNone
Budget-constrained15 labels1
Scale-constrained9 labelsNone
Negative19 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative59 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.
“Trace storage | Jaeger | Free & open‑source; can be run in "all‑in‑one" mode for small volumes.” MiniMax M2.5 · Telemetry pipelines · budget prompt · first choice
“Alternatives getting positive mentions: - Open-source: Jaeger, Zipkin, Prometheus (but factor in operational costs)” Kimi K2 · APM · negative prompt · alternative
“You would generally not use Jaeger for logs or metrics; it sits alongside other pipelines” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Telemetry pipelines · comparative prompt · alternative
“Zero-cost metrics and tracing foundation: Prometheus + Jaeger – free, battle-tested.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Telemetry pipelines · 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.
“self-hosted open-source tools like Prometheus, Grafana, Loki, and Jaeger ... avoid self-hosting your entire APM stack” Gemini 3.5 Flash · APM · negative prompt · soft negative
“Using open-source tools like Prometheus, Grafana, Jaeger, and the ELK ... high Total Cost of Ownership” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Observability · negative prompt · soft negative
“General Caution: "Open Source" Tools ... these tools can become a liability rather than a solution” GLM 4.7 FlashX · APM · negative prompt · soft negative
“these are signal-specific, not full pipelines like modern ones” Grok 4.20 · Telemetry pipelines · comparative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Jaeger, over the 59 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Jaeger was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Jaeger, over the 59 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Jaeger 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 Jaeger. 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 45 of the 59 answers that named Jaeger and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
motadata.com20
newrelic.com19
uptrace.dev17
middleware.io16
coralogix.com15
signoz.io15
openobserve.ai14
atatus.com12
drizz.dev11
g2.com11
No domain is on file for Jaeger, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Jaeger stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Jaeger stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 27,100 a month (“jaeger”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 7,072 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 11 of 124 in telemetry pipelines
Segment leader
37%
OpenTelemetry Collector
- First choices
- 1 across its categories
- Named in
- 59 answers
- Its own site cited
- No site on file to match
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.
Names read as Jaeger
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Jaeger; a claim can dispute any of them.
Elasticsearch/Loki/Jaeger 1Jaeger / Zipkin 1Jaeger/Zipkin 1
Follow Jaeger
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.
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 Jaeger'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 Jaeger, 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 Jaeger by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Jaeger 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 Jaeger, 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.