Index › Products › Telegraf · October 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Telegraf

5Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

3 / 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

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Telegraf was named 3 times in Telemetry pipelines, where OpenTelemetry Collector led with 37%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business35 of 103

under the label threshold

Mid-market38 of 124

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

In telemetry pipelines · 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 Telegraf 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
Telemetry pipelines	IT operations and endpoint	0%	38 of 124	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by OpenTelemetry Collector at 37%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Telegraf 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 Telegraf 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	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	1	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	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	1	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	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

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 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.

“The Metrics Specialist... Not designed for logs/traces” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Telemetry pipelines · comparative 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 Telegraf, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Telegraf was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

OpenTelemetry Collector3 of 52Not among the top eight

Jaeger3 of 51Not among the top eight

Prometheus3 of 51Not among the top eight

Fluentd3 of 50Not among the top eight

Vector3 of 50Not among the top eight

Grafana Cloud2 of 51Not among the top eight

Grafana Loki2 of 51Not among the top eight

Amazon Kinesis Data Streams2 of 50Not among the top eight

Apache Kafka2 of 50Not among the top eight

Apache Pulsar2 of 50Not 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 Telegraf. 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 2 of the 5 answers that named Telegraf and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

aiopsschool.com2

chronosphere.io2

edgedelta.com2

external.pi.gpi.aws.gartner.com2

honeycomb.io2

kentik.com2

mezmo.com2

worldmetrics.org2

algoramming.com1

aptosolutions.co.uk1

No domain is on file for Telegraf, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

aiopsschool.com/blog/telemetry-pipeline2

edgedelta.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/674488871ba0da4611a147c3_whitepaper-sharing-compr2

external.pi.gpi.aws.gartner.com/reviews/market/telemetry-pipelines2

honeycomb.io/blog/what-is-a-telemetry-pipeline2

kentik.com/kentipedia/network-telemetry-pipelines2

worldmetrics.org/best/telemetry-software2

algoramming.com/blogs/observability-startups-opentelemetry-budget1

aptosolutions.co.uk/lp/the-telemetry-pipeline-playbook-whitepaper1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow Telegraf

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.

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 Telegraf'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 Telegraf, 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 Telegraf by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Telegraf 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 Telegraf, 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.