Every category where a model named Uptrace 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
Observability platforms	IT operations and endpoint	0%	12 of 63	0%	8	under 10 labels · led by Grafana at 29%
Application performance monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	35 of 70	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by New Relic at 54%
Infrastructure monitoring	IT operations and endpoint	0%	45 of 65	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Site24x7 at 24%

Movement

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

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

Direct5 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative8 labelsNone

Budget-constrained16 labels1

Scale-constrained3 labelsNone

Negative5 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative38 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.

“Uptrace is an open-source APM tool that also offers a highly affordable hosted cloud service” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Observability · budget prompt · alternative

“A cost-effective option that is suitable for mid-market companies looking to scale.” Llama 4 Maverick · Observability · direct prompt · alternative

“SigNoz or Uptrace \u2014 Excellent open-source, OpenTelemetry-native options” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Observability · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Enterprise features at startup prices, OTel-native from day one” MiniMax M2.5 · Observability · budget 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 Uptrace, over the 38 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Uptrace was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

New Relic34 of 3810Not in the top three

Datadog31 of 385Not in the top three

Grafana24 of 3812Not in the top three

SigNoz21 of 387Not in the top three

Better Stack16 of 385Not in the top three

OpenObserve9 of 380Not in the top three

Dynatrace7 of 380Not in the top three

Prometheus6 of 380Not in the top three

Honeycomb5 of 381Not in the top three

Coralogix5 of 380Not 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 Uptrace. 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 37 of the 38 answers that named Uptrace and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

uptrace.devYour site33

toolradar.com22

ir.com15

motadata.com13

openobserve.ai13

coralogix.com12

gartner.com12

cubeapm.com10

augmentcode.com9

betterstack.com9

115 of the 148 domain citations in answers naming Uptrace came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

uptrace.dev/tools/top-observability-tools24

toolradar.com/guides/best-observability-platforms19

ir.com/guides/top-observability-tools-comparison-2026-smbs-vs-enterprise-platforms15

gartner.com/reviews/market/observability-platforms11

coralogix.com/guides/observability/observability-platforms10

metoro.io/blog/best-observability-tools9

motadata.com/blog/observability-tools9

augmentcode.com/tools/best-observability-platforms7

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 Uptrace'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 Uptrace, 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 uptrace.dev 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.