IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Jaeger · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Jaeger

22Judge labels

0First choices

9Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

6 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Jaeger was named 6 times in APM and 1 other category, where New Relic led with 54%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business42 of 58

under the label threshold

Mid-market67 of 70

under the label threshold

Enterprise42 of 58

under the label threshold

In apm · 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
Application performance monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	67 of 70	60%	5	under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 54%
Observability platforms	IT operations and endpoint	0%	35 of 63	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Grafana at 29%

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, 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. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative12 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative22 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Open-source / Vendor-neutral | Prometheus + Grafana, Jaeger, Zipkin” Kimi K2 · APM · negative prompt · alternative

“Open-Source/Low-Cost: Jaeger/Zipkin (tracing)” Grok 4.1 Fast · APM · negative prompt · alternative

“Jaeger for distributed tracing” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Observability · 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.

“open-source options (e.g., SigNoz, Prometheus + Grafana, Jaeger), which are free but require your own infrastructure” Grok 4.1 Fast · APM · budget prompt · soft negative

“SkyWalking / Jaeger / Other Single-Component OSS ... Why to be cautious” Qwen 3.7 Flash · APM · negative prompt · soft negative

“this "free" solution is rarely free in practice” Gemini 3.5 Flash · APM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Jaeger, over the 22 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.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Datadog21 of 221Not in the top three

Dynatrace18 of 222Not in the top three

New Relic16 of 224Not in the top three

Prometheus16 of 220Not in the top three

AppDynamics13 of 220Not in the top three

Grafana12 of 222Not in the top three

SigNoz10 of 220Not in the top three

Grafana Cloud7 of 221Not in the top three

Honeycomb7 of 221Not in the top three

Elastic APM5 of 221Not 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 Jaeger. 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 13 of the 22 answers that named Jaeger and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

openobserve.ai8

ardura.consulting7

cubeapm.com7

g2.com7

newrelic.com6

toolradar.com6

dev.to5

instatus.com5

sre.wang5

atatus.com4

Sixty of the sixty domain citations in answers naming Jaeger came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

ardura.consulting/blog/apm-tools-comparison-20267

openobserve.ai/blog/top-10-apm-tools6

instatus.com/blog/apm-tools5

sre.wang/en/posts/monitoring-apm-tool-selection5

newrelic.com/blog/apm/application-performance-monitoring-tools4

novaaiops.com/blog/datadog-vs-dynatrace-vs-new-relic-20264

openobserve.ai/blog/opensource-apm-tools4

toolradar.com/guides/best-application-monitoring-tools4

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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.

Prometheus + Jaeger + Grafana 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 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.

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 jaeger.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.