IT AI Index

Index › Products › OpenNMS · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

OpenNMS

10Judge labels

1First choices

3Negative labels

5 / 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.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. OpenNMS was named 3 times in Network monitoring, where Auvik led with 26%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business10 of 77

under the label threshold

Mid-market56 of 78

under the label threshold

Enterprise31 of 100

under the label threshold

In network monitoring · 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 OpenNMS 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
Network monitoring and management	Network and edge	0%	56 of 78	33%	3	under 10 labels · led by Auvik at 26%

Movement

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

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained2 labels1

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 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.

“OpenNMS is best for open source flexibility needs.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Network monitoring · comparative 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.

“OpenNMS has had historical issues including web UI XSS and privilege-related bugs in its advisory history.” GPT-5.4 mini · Network monitoring · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as OpenNMS, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OpenNMS was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Zabbix10 of 101Not among the top eight

Paessler PRTG Network Monitor8 of 101Not among the top eight

ManageEngine OpManager6 of 101Not among the top eight

Auvik5 of 101Not among the top eight

Datadog Network Monitoring5 of 101Not among the top eight

LogicMonitor5 of 101Not among the top eight

SolarWinds Network Performance Monitor5 of 101Not among the top eight

Dynatrace4 of 101Not among the top eight

Kentik4 of 101Not among the top eight

Nagios4 of 100Not among the top eight

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 OpenNMS. 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 9 of the 10 answers that named OpenNMS and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

virtana.com5

comparitech.com4

kentik.com4

techradar.com4

learn.g2.com3

pandorafms.com3

uptrace.dev3

acceron.net2

adaptiveis.net2

blog.domotz.com2

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

Pages cited

virtana.com/blog/best-network-monitoring-tools5

kentik.com/kentipedia/best-network-monitoring-tools-20264

pandorafms.com/blog/network-monitoring-tools3

techradar.com/best/best-network-monitoring-tools3

acceron.net/blog/7-must-have-network-monitoring-tools-for-enterprises2

adaptiveis.net/blog/network-performance-monitoring-tools2

blog.domotz.com/all/enterprise-network-monitoring-tools2

cloudnuro.ai/blog/top-10-network-performance-monitoring-tools-for-it-teams-20252

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

opennms.com ranks 5 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, OpenNMS takes 0% of first choices and Auvik takes 26%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “network monitoring tool”

Position for “network monitoring tools”

–

not in the top ten

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 56 of 78 in network monitoring

Segment leader

26%

Auvik

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 10 answers
Its own site cited: in 9 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 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.

What it publishes

ShowHide

Addresses on opennms.com

4,010

subdomains included

Content

673

counted in the table below

Documentation

2,735

Product · Integration

3 · 0

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest	Categories named
Blog	491	8	2026-09-10	Time series DBs
Conference or event	77	undated
Template or tool	68	undated
Glossary or explainer	20	0	2021-05-11
News or press	8	undated
Case study	7	0	2020-08-20
Webinar or virtual event	1	undated
Report or ebook	1	0	2023-08-31

Most recent

2026-09-102026 09 10 meridian 2026 an architectural leapfrog blog
2026-09-092026 09 09 september 2026 releases meridian 2025 0 10 and 2024 3 13 blog
2026-09-022026 09 02 llm alarm correlation root cause analysis blog
2026-08-122026 08 12 august 2026 releases meridian 2025 0 9 and 2024 3 12 blog
2026-08-042026 08 04 hugging face intrusion network monitoring blog
2026-07-232026 07 23 how to set up unified network monitoring a step by step guide blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page opennms.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read October 5, 2026.

Follow OpenNMS

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

OpenNMS is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Enterprise Network Monitoring for Complex, Distributed Infrastructure
opennms.com
For: Companies in the Fortune 100
opennms.com
Price stated: $49,000 opennms.com
Starting price: $49,000 opennms.com
Free plan or trial: Free, community-based, quick release distribution that contains all of the newest features developed for the platform. opennms.com/platform
Integrations claimed: 14 opennms.com/platform
Not stated on the pages read: Certifications, hosting, customers

What OpenNMS's own pages state, read October 6, 2026: opennms.com, opennms.com/pricing, opennms.com/security, opennms.com/platform. 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 OpenNMS'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 OpenNMS, 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 OpenNMS by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where OpenNMS 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 OpenNMS, 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.