Small business▲+6Since September 2026: 6% → 13%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
13%from 6% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 5 → 3 of 59
4 categories · RankedPagerDuty
272Judge labels
47First choices
89Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
4Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
57% in Incidents for enterprise buyers
Rank 2 of 65 in the mid-market standingcriticized challenger
3 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 33% of its 72 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of PagerDuty →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business3 of 63
11%68 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market2 of 65
15%72 labels
criticized challenger
Enterprise1 of 44
57%74 labels
criticized default
In incidents · 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 PagerDuty 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incident management and on-call | IT operations and endpoint | 15% | 2 of 65 | 33% | 72 | criticized challenger | ▼−6Since September 2026: 22% → 15%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| AIOps platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 2% | 12 of 93 | 7% | 14 | accepted challenger | |
| Observability platforms | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 42 of 80 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Grafana at 27% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
| Website and synthetic monitoring | IT operations and endpoint | 0% | 26 of 67 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by UptimeRobot at 24% |
Movement
Since September 2026, PagerDuty held within the floor in all four categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Incidents · by segment
Mid-market▼−6Since September 2026: 22% → 15%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
15%from 22% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 5 pointsRank 2 of 57, unchanged
Enterprise▲+9Since September 2026: 50% → 59%, +9 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
59%from 50% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 2 pointsRank 1 of 39, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidents | 22% | 15% | ▼−6Since September 2026: 22% → 15%, −6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 2 of 65, unchanged |
| AIOps | 0% | 2% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 2% now. | New this edition | Rank 12 of 93, unchanged |
| Observability | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 42 of 80, unchanged |
| Uptime monitoring | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 26 of 67, unchanged |
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 PagerDuty 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 PagerDuty 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 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 10 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| Grok 4.20 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| Mistral Small | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 8 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
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
Direct54 labels16
Paraphrase47 labels20
Comparative56 labels23not counted in share
Budget-constrained43 labels5
Scale-constrained30 labels6
Negative42 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative272 labels in all, every segment counted; 47 of the 72 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.
“the sweet spot is likely a modern "Cloud-Native" Incident Manager (like PagerDuty, Opsgenie, Statuspage, or newer competitors like FireHydrant or Phoebe)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Incidents · scale prompt · first choice
“PagerDuty – Best for enterprise incident management, strong end-to-end orchestration, AI/automation, and Slack/Teams integration. Pricing higher, feature rich.” Muse Glimmer 30B · Incidents · scale prompt · first choice
“Industry leader with 750+ integrations ... Choose PagerDuty if you need dedicated alerting, on-call management, and have diverse tooling” MiniMax M2.5 · Incidents · comparative prompt · first choice
“starting with a dedicated incident management tool (like PagerDuty or Incident.io) rather than a full ITSM suite will provide better value” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Incidents · negative prompt · first choice
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.
“Avoid PagerDuty unless you truly need enterprise-grade features” Kimi K2 · Incidents · budget prompt · hard negative
“The legacy heavyweight. Unrivaled for raw paging and alert routing reliability, but can feel clunky, expensive, and require a lot of manual configuration” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Incidents · scale prompt · soft negative
“their paid tiers are expensive. Their "Starter" edition is free, but it lacks advanced reporting and custom escalation rules” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Incidents · budget prompt · soft negative
“Frequently criticized for high costs, especially when adding AI features ($1,100+/month extra on top of per-seat pricing)” MiniMax M2.5 · Incidents · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as PagerDuty, over the 272 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and PagerDuty was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as PagerDuty, over the 272 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and PagerDuty 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 PagerDuty. 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 249 of the 272 answers that named PagerDuty and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
incident.io132
motadata.com127
rootly.com122
g2.com88
pagerduty.comYour site82
expertinsights.com67
guideflow.com66
complyjet.com64
monday.com59
hyperping.com57
782 of the 864 domain citations in answers naming PagerDuty came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
pagerduty.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, PagerDuty takes 15% of first choices and incident.io takes 32%.ShowHide
Search and answers
pagerduty.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, PagerDuty takes 15% of first choices and incident.io takes 32%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “incident management platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “incident management platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 27,100 a month (“pagerduty”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 685 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 82,470 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 4,583 · 722 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 10,491
- Paid Google search
- 2 searches its ads show for, about 139 clicks and $1,433 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
15%
rank 2 of 65 in incidents
Segment leader
32%
incident.io
- First choices
- 47 across its categories
- Named in
- 272 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 249 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on pagerduty.com
4,205
subdomains included
Content
1,821
counted in the table below
Documentation
1,796
Product · Integration
64 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 415 | 26 | 2026-09-22 | Observability | |
| News or press | 384 | 4 | 2026-09-02 | ||
| Report or ebook | 324 | 7 | 2026-09-10 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 311 | 4 | 2026-09-10 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 147 | 4 | 2026-07-24 | ||
| Case study | 146 | 3 | 2026-07-21 | ||
| Conference or event | 38 | 0 | 2025-11-06 | ||
| Comparison | 27 | 4 | 2026-09-10 | ||
| Template or tool | 22 | 0 | 2025-09-05 | ||
| Podcast or video | 7 | 0 | 2024-08-13 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-22Ai operations process map blog
- 2026-09-16Automate incident management with pagerduty slack blog
- 2026-09-15Mcp server intelligent tools blog
- 2026-09-14Senior engineering problem blog
- 2026-09-10The rise of shadow ai in the workplace blog
- 2026-09-10Disruption tax downtime vs ai value comparison
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page pagerduty.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 September 29, 2026.
Names read as PagerDuty
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as PagerDuty; a claim can dispute any of them.
Pagerduty 1
Follow PagerDuty
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
PagerDuty is its own company.ShowHide
The company
PagerDuty is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- The AI-First Operations Platform
- For
- Practitioners / Developers; Technical Leaders
- Price stated
- Free; $21 / user / mo; $2,800 / year; $12,000 / year; $48,000 / year; Custom Pricing pagerduty.com/pricing
- Starting price
- 0 pagerduty.com/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Start for Free; Start free trial pagerduty.com
- Integrations claimed
- 750 pagerduty.com
- Certifications
- FedRAMP® Authorization at the Low baselineSOC 2 Type IIISO 27001
- Customers named
- TUIZoomSpotifyDraftKingsAustralian BankVodafoneFox CorporationSAP
- Not stated on the pages read
- Hosting
What PagerDuty's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: pagerduty.com, pagerduty.com/pricing, pagerduty.com/security, pagerduty.com/platform, pagerduty.com/customers. 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 PagerDuty'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 PagerDuty, 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 PagerDuty by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where PagerDuty 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 PagerDuty, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where PagerDuty is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where PagerDuty is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHidePagerDuty is among the products AI models recommend first in Incident management and on-call this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.