Every category where a model named Scout Monitoring 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
Error and crash monitoring	Developer platform	2%	4 of 44	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Sentry at 82%

Movement

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

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

Direct4 labels1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative5 labelsNone

Budget-constrained4 labels1

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative17 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.

“the best error monitoring tools for a mid-market B2B company are Rollbar and Scout Monitoring” Mistral Small · Error monitoring · direct prompt · first choice

“(Best for Specific Tech Stacks)” MiniMax M2.5 · Error monitoring · direct 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 Scout Monitoring, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Scout Monitoring was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Sentry16 of 179Not in the top three

Rollbar13 of 171Not in the top three

Datadog7 of 170Not in the top three

Honeybadger6 of 172Not in the top three

Bugsnag5 of 171Not in the top three

Airbrake4 of 170Not in the top three

Raygun4 of 170Not in the top three

GlitchTip3 of 170Not in the top three

CubeAPM2 of 171Not in the top three

Better Stack2 of 170Not 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 Scout Monitoring. 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 17 of the 17 answers that named Scout Monitoring and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

scoutapm.com17

rollbar.com12

guideflow.com9

raygun.com8

getlogwise.com7

radartrek.com6

worldmetrics.org6

cubeapm.com5

inventivehq.com5

observeone.com5

Eighty of the eighty domain citations in answers naming Scout Monitoring came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

scoutapm.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools16

rollbar.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools11

guideflow.com/blog/error-monitoring-software9

raygun.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools8

getlogwise.com/blog/best-error-monitoring-tools-20257

radartrek.com/error-monitoring6

worldmetrics.org/best/error-monitoring-software6

inventivehq.com/blog/best-error-tracking-tools-sentry-alternatives5

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Scout Monitoring'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 Scout Monitoring, 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 scout.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.