IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Pingdom · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Pingdom

6Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

2Categories

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

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Pingdom was named 4 times in Infra monitoring and 1 other category, where Site24x7 led with 24%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business24 of 62

under the label threshold

Mid-market62 of 65

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In infra 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 Pingdom 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
Infrastructure monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	62 of 65	67%	3	under 10 labels · led by Site24x7 at 24%
Application performance monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	54 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 Pingdom 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 Pingdom across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative6 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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 use this as your sole infrastructure monitoring tool.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Infra monitoring · negative prompt · hard negative

“such as Pingdom or Checkly, are not ideal if you need deep infrastructure or protocol-level checks” Perplexity Sonar · Infra monitoring · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Pingdom, over the 6 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Pingdom was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

New Relic6 of 61Not in the top three

Datadog5 of 61Not in the top three

Zabbix5 of 60Not in the top three

UptimeRobot4 of 61Not in the top three

Netdata2 of 61Not in the top three

Checkly2 of 60Not in the top three

Dynatrace2 of 60Not in the top three

Grafana2 of 60Not in the top three

Nagios2 of 60Not in the top three

Prometheus + Grafana2 of 60Not 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 Pingdom. 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 3 of the 6 answers that named Pingdom and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

dash0.com3

gartner.com3

instatus.com3

netdata.cloud3

signoz.io3

ciopages.com2

dotcom-monitor.com2

middleware.io2

newrelic.com2

sematext.com2

Twenty-five of the twenty-five domain citations in answers naming Pingdom came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

dash0.com/comparisons/infrastructure-monitoring-tools3

gartner.com/reviews/market/infrastructure-monitoring-tools3

netdata.cloud/resources/best-infrastructure-monitoring-tools3

signoz.io/comparisons/infrastructure-monitoring-tools3

ciopages.com/articles/infrastructure-monitoring-guide2

dotcom-monitor.com/blog/best-tools-for-synthetic-infrastructure-monitoring2

instatus.com/blog/infrastructure-monitoring-tools2

middleware.io/blog/infrastructure-monitoring-tools2

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Pingdom

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

Pingdom / UptimeRobot 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 Pingdom'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 Pingdom, 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 pingdom.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.