IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › OpenTelemetry · September 2026 Edition

3 categories · Named, not ranked

OpenTelemetry

16Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

7 of 12Models named it

3Categories

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

Standing

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. OpenTelemetry was named 8 times in APM and 2 other categories, 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 business21 of 58

under the label threshold

Mid-market33 of 70

under the label threshold

Enterprise22 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 OpenTelemetry 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%	33 of 70	25%	4	under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 54%
Observability platforms	IT operations and endpoint	0%	20 of 63	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Grafana at 29%
Infrastructure monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	42 of 65	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Site24x7 at 24%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for OpenTelemetry 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 OpenTelemetry 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	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	2	0	0	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	1	1	2
Kimi K2	2	0	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	0	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase3 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained5 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative6 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative16 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 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.

“Grafana Tempo + OpenTelemetry (or SigNoz/OpenObserve) can be a very cost\u2011effective long\u2011term choice” GLM 4.7 FlashX · APM · direct prompt · alternative

“The current industry trend favors OpenTelemetry for instrumentation (to avoid agent lock-in)” Kimi K2 · Infra monitoring · negative prompt · alternative

“Add OpenTelemetry for instrumentation (works with any stack)” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Observability · budget prompt · alternative

“Vendor-neutral instrumentation standard” Kimi K2 · Observability · negative 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.

“"Free Until Not Free" Reality... Operational Overhead” Qwen 3.7 Flash · APM · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as OpenTelemetry, over the 16 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OpenTelemetry was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

New Relic14 of 161Not in the top three

Datadog12 of 161Not in the top three

Dynatrace9 of 160Not in the top three

Grafana7 of 164Not in the top three

Prometheus6 of 160Not in the top three

SigNoz5 of 161Not in the top three

Jaeger5 of 160Not in the top three

Splunk5 of 160Not in the top three

Grafana Cloud4 of 161Not in the top three

Grafana Loki4 of 161Not 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 OpenTelemetry. 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 9 of the 16 answers that named OpenTelemetry and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

newrelic.com5

oneuptime.com5

gartner.com4

motadata.com4

openobserve.ai4

signoz.io4

betterstack.com3

dynatrace.com3

grafana.com3

groundcover.com3

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

Pages cited

tryorbye.com/products/datadog3

ardura.consulting/blog/apm-tools-comparison-20262

datadoghq.com/pricing2

gartner.com/reviews/market/infrastructure-monitoring-tools2

gartner.com/reviews/market/observability-platforms2

grafana.com/solutions/opentelemetry2

groundcover.com/guides/apm-tools-comparison-engineering-teams2

instatus.com/blog/infrastructure-monitoring-tools2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as OpenTelemetry

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as OpenTelemetry; a claim can dispute any of them.

Grafana Tempo + OpenTelemetry 1OpenTelemetry (Self-Hosted) 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 OpenTelemetry'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 OpenTelemetry, 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 opentelemetry.io 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.