Small business▲+3Since September 2026: 0% → 3%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
3%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 13 → 6 of 53
New Relic · 1 category · RankedNew Relic Logs
67Judge labels
4First choices
10Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in Logs for enterprise buyers
Rank 14 of 73 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 8% of its 25 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of New Relic Logs →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business6 of 56
3%23 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market14 of 73
0%25 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise5 of 66
4%19 labels
accepted challenger
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 New Relic Logs 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log management | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 14 of 73 | 8% | 25 | accepted challenger | ▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, New Relic Logs held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Logs · by segment
Mid-market▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 10% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 1 pointRank 4 → 14 of 66
Enterprise▲+1Since September 2026: 4% → 5%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
5%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 10 pointsRank 6 → 5 of 62
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Logs | 10% | 0% | ▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 4 → 14 of 73 |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated New Relic Logs 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 New Relic Logs 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 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 2 | 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
Direct11 labelsNone
Paraphrase6 labelsNone
Comparative19 labelsNone
Budget-constrained11 labels3
Scale-constrained13 labels1
Negative7 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative67 labels in all, every segment counted; 4 of the 4 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.
“a reasonable choice if you want logs tightly integrated with metrics and traces in one platform” Perplexity Sonar · Logs · direct prompt · alternative
“If your focus is on application performance, New Relic is a strong alternative” Mistral Small · Logs · direct prompt · alternative
“Unified observability across logs/metrics/traces | Datadog or New Relic” GPT-5.4 mini · Logs · comparative prompt · alternative
“Cloud-native and easy to deploy ... Competitive pricing for mid-market” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Logs · paraphrase 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.
“Infamously expensive; licensing models can lead to restrictive budget capping.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Logs · scale prompt · soft negative
“Logging is secondary to their core APM/metrics business” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Logs · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as New Relic Logs, over the 67 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and New Relic Logs was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as New Relic Logs, over the 67 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and New Relic Logs 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 New Relic Logs. 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 59 of the 67 answers that named New Relic Logs and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cribl.io35
openobserve.ai35
middleware.io29
dupple.com20
learn.g2.com19
signoz.io18
motadata.com16
dnsstuff.com15
expertinsights.com15
guideflow.com15
217 of the 217 domain citations in answers naming New Relic Logs came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
newrelic.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, New Relic Logs takes 0% of first choices and Datadog Log Management takes 28%.ShowHide
Search and answers
newrelic.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, New Relic Logs takes 0% of first choices and Datadog Log Management takes 28%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “log management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “log management platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 90 a month (“new relic logs”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 21 a month
- Its company's site
- newrelic.com shared with New Relic's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 83,276 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 44,479 · 808 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 24,898
- Paid Google search
- 2 searches its ads show for, about 16 clicks and $412 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 14 of 73 in logs
Segment leader
28%
Datadog Log Management
- First choices
- 4 across its categories
- Named in
- 67 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 59 of the answers that named it
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 New Relic Logs
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as New Relic Logs; a claim can dispute any of them.
New Relic 23
Follow New Relic Logs
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.
The company
New Relic is the company behind New Relic Logs.ShowHide
The company
New Relic is the company behind New Relic Logs.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from New Relic
- New Relic AIOps, New Relic Browser, New Relic Errors Inbox, New Relic Synthetics
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The next evolution in log analysis
- Price stated
- Transparent usage-based pricing. No hidden fees. newrelic.com/platform/log-management
- Starting price
- 0.40 newrelic.com/platform/log-management
- Free plan or trial
- 100GB/month free newrelic.com/platform/log-management
- Integrations claimed
- 1 newrelic.com/instant-observability/logs-api
- Certifications
- FedRAMP & HIPAA Compliance
- Customers named
- Getttech.SB (Simply Business)World KinectShutterstockDomino'sEveryMatrixVerizonWilliam Hill
- Not stated on the pages read
- Who it is for, hosting
What New Relic Logs's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: newrelic.com/platform/log-management, newrelic.com/instant-observability/apm-logs, newrelic.com/instant-observability/logs-api, newrelic.com/instant-observability/heroku-logs, newrelic.com/instant-observability/netlify-logs. A claimed page can correct any of 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 New Relic Logs'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 New Relic Logs, 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 New Relic Logs by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where New Relic Logs 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 New Relic Logs, 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.