Every category where a model named LogRocket 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%	8 of 44	7%	15	accepted challenger
Application performance monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	42 of 70	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 54%

Movement

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

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

Direct8 labelsNone

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative11 labelsNone

Budget-constrained5 labelsNone

Scale-constrained7 labelsNone

Negative9 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative45 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.

“LogRocket / Highlight.io: If your product is highly visual and frontend-heavy, these tools combine error tracking with robust session replay” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Error monitoring · scale prompt · alternative

“LogRocket pairs session replay with detailed frontend logs and network data” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Error monitoring · comparative prompt · alternative

“LogRocket | Frontend + replays | $99/mo post-free | Backend limited” Grok 4.1 Fast · Error monitoring · scale prompt · alternative

“LogRocket | Combines session replay with error tracking natively.” Kimi K2 · Error monitoring · direct 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.

“Do not deploy session replay tools unless your legal team has cleared your cookie consent banners” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Error monitoring · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as LogRocket, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and LogRocket was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Sentry41 of 4528Not in the top three

Rollbar33 of 451Not in the top three

Datadog32 of 457Not in the top three

Bugsnag28 of 450Not in the top three

New Relic25 of 454Not in the top three

Honeybadger17 of 451Not in the top three

Raygun14 of 450Not in the top three

Airbrake13 of 450Not in the top three

GlitchTip8 of 451Not in the top three

AppSignal8 of 450Not 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 LogRocket. 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 30 of the 45 answers that named LogRocket and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

scoutapm.com22

rollbar.com17

guideflow.com15

worldmetrics.org12

cubeapm.com11

ones.com11

logrocket.comYour site10

betterstack.com9

g2.com9

newrelic.com9

115 of the 125 domain citations in answers naming LogRocket came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

scoutapm.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools16

guideflow.com/blog/error-monitoring-software13

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

worldmetrics.org/best/error-monitoring-software12

ones.com/blog/error-reporting-software-comparison-8-tools-worth-trying10

logrocket.com/for/error-monitoring-software9

raygun.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools9

observeone.com/best/error-monitoring-tools8

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 LogRocket'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 LogRocket, 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 logrocket.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.