IT AI Index

Index › Products › Pulsetic · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Pulsetic

13Judge labels

2First choices

1Negative labels

11 / 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

4 labels, too few to rank

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

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business11 of 65

under the label threshold

Mid-market18 of 67

under the label threshold

Enterprise13 of 86

under the label threshold

In uptime 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 Pulsetic 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
Website and synthetic monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	18 of 67	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by UptimeRobot at 24%

Movement

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

ShowHide

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

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

Direct3 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 label1

Negative3 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative13 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 2 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.

“Pulsetic being the most affordable paid option if you need more reliability than the free tiers offer” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Uptime monitoring · budget prompt · alternative

“For Flat-Rate, Simple Performance: Hyperping or Pulsetic” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Uptime monitoring · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Pulsetic, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Pulsetic was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

UptimeRobot12 of 134Not among the top eight

Better Stack9 of 130Not among the top eight

Uptime Kuma6 of 132Not among the top eight

Pingdom6 of 130Not among the top eight

Hyperping5 of 131Not among the top eight

Datadog Synthetic Monitoring4 of 131Not among the top eight

Site24x74 of 131Not among the top eight

StatusCake3 of 132Not among the top eight

HetrixTools3 of 131Not among the top eight

Cronitor2 of 130Not 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 Pulsetic. 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 13 of the 13 answers that named Pulsetic and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hyperping.com10

uptimerobot.com9

runcloud.io6

motadata.com5

odown.com5

tryanalyze.ai5

bootstrap.build4

webdesignerhut.com4

capterra.com3

cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com3

Fifty-four of the fifty-four domain citations in answers naming Pulsetic came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

runcloud.io/blog/top-website-uptime-monitoring-tools6

tryanalyze.ai/blog/website-monitoring-tools5

hyperping.com/blog/best-uptimerobot-alternatives4

hyperping.com/blog/best-website-monitoring-tools4

motadata.com/blog/best-website-monitoring-tools4

uptimerobot.com/pricing4

webdesignerhut.com/best-uptime-monitoring-tools4

cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com/tools/top-10-website-monitoring-tools/1298151693

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

pulsetic.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Pulsetic takes 0% of first choices and UptimeRobot takes 24%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “uptime monitoring tool”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “website monitoring tools”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 390 a month (“pulsetic”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 1 a month
Organic visits to its site: about 38,196 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 4,237 · 149 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 1,099
Paid Google search: No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none

Ads on Google

None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 18 of 67 in uptime monitoring

Segment leader

24%

UptimeRobot

First choices: 2 across its categories
Named in: 13 answers
Its own site cited: in 13 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 pulsetic.com

419

subdomains included

Content

103

counted in the table below

Documentation

106

Product · Integration

0 · 11

Kind	Pages	Last 90 days	Latest
Glossary or explainer	37	1	2026-07-09
Comparison	29	0	2026-06-30
Template or tool	22	1	2026-10-01
Blog	15	12	2026-08-25

Most recent

2026-10-01Uptime sla calculator template or tool
2026-08-25Ping command blog
2026-08-25Runbook blog
2026-08-25Service degradation blog
2026-08-25Api testing strategies blog
2026-08-25High cardinality blog

How it is countedHide how it is counted

Every page pulsetic.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. Read October 5, 2026.

Follow Pulsetic

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

Pulsetic is its own company.

ShowHide

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Free website uptime monitoring: 10 monitors, alerts confirmed from other regions and 3 status pages on your own domain.
pulsetic.com
Price stated: Free plan pulsetic.com
Starting price: 9 pulsetic.com
Free plan or trial: The free plan covers 10 monitors, 3 status pages on your own domain and unlimited email alerts, for as long as you want it. pulsetic.com
Integrations claimed: 4300 pulsetic.com · 11 pulsetic.com/integrations pages disagree
Customers named: ASMLNorthBuiltSporulate DesignMBDC MediaSiena AIPlutioFundacion Jorge Luis BorgesnineLemon
Not stated on the pages read: Who it is for, certifications, hosting

What Pulsetic's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: pulsetic.com, pulsetic.com/pricing, pulsetic.com/integrations. 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 Pulsetic'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 Pulsetic, 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 Pulsetic by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Pulsetic 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 Pulsetic, 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.