IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Loggly · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Loggly

9Judge labels

0First choices

4Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

1Category

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

Standing

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Loggly was named 2 times in Logs, where Datadog Log Management led with 20%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business20 of 53

under the label threshold

Mid-market34 of 59

under the label threshold

Enterprise52 of 54

under the label threshold

In logs · 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 Loggly 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
Log management	IT operations and endpoint	0%	34 of 59	0%	2	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 Loggly 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 Loggly across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative9 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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 Loggly, over the 9 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Loggly was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Splunk9 of 91Not in the top three

Datadog Log Management8 of 90Not in the top three

Elastic Stack7 of 91Not in the top three

Graylog7 of 90Not in the top three

SolarWinds Papertrail7 of 90Not in the top three

Grafana Loki6 of 91Not in the top three

Sumo Logic5 of 91Not in the top three

Better Stack3 of 92Not in the top three

OpenObserve3 of 90Not in the top three

Dynatrace2 of 90Not 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 Loggly. 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 7 of the 9 answers that named Loggly and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

dash0.com5

cubeapm.com4

signoz.io4

exabeam.com3

grepr.ai3

toolradar.com3

401clicks.com2

community.spiceworks.com2

comparitech.com2

cribl.io2

Thirty of the thirty domain citations in answers naming Loggly came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

dash0.com/comparisons/best-log-management-tools5

signoz.io/blog/best-log-management-tools4

dash0.com/comparisons/best-log-monitoring-tools3

exabeam.com/explainers/log-management/top-6-log-management-tools-and-how-to-choose3

grepr.ai/blog/best-log-management-tools-in-2026-a-realists-buying-guide3

community.spiceworks.com/t/looking-for-a-good-log-management-system-for-a-small-business-12

comparitech.com/net-admin/log-management-tools2

cubeapm.com/blog/top-log-management-tools2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

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 Loggly'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 Loggly, 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 loggly.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.