Vendor Observatory

Revealed Preference

Benchmarks
Vendor IntelPrompt Intel
Analytics
QuerySearchInsights
Data
VendorsPlatformsActionsSessions
v0.2.0
Home/Vendor Intel/Datadog

Datadog

datadoghq.com📊 Observability
ProfileAI-ReadinessTrendCategoriesConstraintsCompetitiveScenariosRecommendations

Recommendation Profile

Primary Recommendations

0

Total Mentions

52

Win Rate

0%

Implementation Rate

0%

AI-Readiness Score

How well your documentation and SDK help AI assistants recommend and implement your tool

15
Grade: F

out of 100

Implementation Rate(30%)0/100

How often AI writes code after recommending

Win Rate(20%)0/100

How often selected as primary choice

Constraint Coverage(20%)0/100

% of prompt constraints addressed

Gotcha Avoidance(15%)100/100

Fewer gotchas = more AI-friendly

Cross-Platform(15%)0/100

Consistency across assistants

Trend

Win Rate Trend

→+0%

0% → 0%

Mention Volume

52(+0 vs prior)

Weekly Activity

1 week of data

Category Breakdown

CategoryRecommendedComparedRejectedTotalWin Rate
🔀 Cross-Category---20%
📖 Developer Portal-2-80%
🚨 Incident Management---80%
📊 Observability-4-180%
⚡ Edge Compute--110%
unknown---70%
🐛 Error Monitoring-2-40%
🔑 Secrets Management---40%

Constraint Scorecard

✗ Constraints When Vendor Lost

Constraints in prompts where this vendor was mentioned but a competitor was chosen

otlp grpc export8×
pii scrubbing8×
free tier 5m spans8×
slo monitoring8×
vendor neutral8×
free tier8×
migrate from backstage6×
managed saas6×
import existing catalog6×
scorecards6×
no dedicated platform team6×
managed platform6×
aws compatible6×
slack alerting6×
small team6×
slack native workflow4×
datadog sentry integration4×
escalation policy4×
status page4×
budget 500mo4×
keep pagerduty4×
slack native4×
jira action items4×
incident metrics4×
stakeholder dashboard4×
serverless compatible4×
auto instrumentation4×
small bundle size4×
sentry integration4×
soc2 ready2×
budget 200mo2×
solo founder2×
saml enterprise2×
low maintenance2×
nextjs app router2×
source maps2×
session replay2×
slack pagerduty alerts2×
budget 30mo2×
lightweight sdk2×
automated release tracking2×
express middleware2×
ecs fargate2×
github integration2×
pagerduty integration2×
incremental adoption2×
self serve2×
kubernetes ok2×
no self hosted2×
github actions integration2×
railway vercel integration2×
access control2×
audit log2×
soc2 type ii2×
automated rotation 90d2×
audit logging2×
fine grained acl2×
encryption at rest2×
sub 10ms cold start1×
kv store1×
vercel integration1×
typescript1×
edge monitoring1×

Competitive Landscape

CompetitorWins Over YouScenarios
incident.io4On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup
Sentry4Error Tracking for Next.js App Router, APM for Serverless Express on Vercel
OpsLevel2Migrate from Backstage to Managed Portal
AWS Secrets Manager2SOC 2 Secrets Management with Automated Rotation
New Relic1Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
Grafana1Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger
Cortex1Migrate from Backstage to Managed Portal
Vercel Edge Functions1Edge Functions for Auth and Geo-Routing
Honeycomb1Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger
Statsig1ff-targeted-02

Head-to-Head: Datadog vs incident.io

Datadog: 0 wins
incident.io: 4 wins
Ties: 4
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ incident.io
Incident Workflow on Top of PagerDuty
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ incident.io
Incident Workflow on Top of PagerDuty
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ incident.io
Incident Workflow on Top of PagerDuty
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ incident.io
Incident Workflow on Top of PagerDuty

✗ Scenarios Lost (18)

Migrate from Backstage to Managed Portal→ lost to OpsLevel
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ lost to incident.io
Migrate from Backstage to Managed Portal→ lost to OpsLevel
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ lost to incident.io
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS→ lost to New Relic
Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger→ lost to Grafana
Migrate from Backstage to Managed Portal→ lost to Cortex
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ lost to incident.io
Edge Functions for Auth and Geo-Routing→ lost to Vercel Edge Functions
Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger→ lost to Honeycomb
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup→ lost to incident.io
Error Tracking for Next.js App Router→ lost to Sentry
APM for Serverless Express on Vercel→ lost to Sentry
SOC 2 Secrets Management with Automated Rotation→ lost to AWS Secrets Manager
Error Tracking for Next.js App Router→ lost to Sentry
APM for Serverless Express on Vercel→ lost to Sentry
SOC 2 Secrets Management with Automated Rotation→ lost to AWS Secrets Manager
ff-targeted-02→ lost to Statsig

🎯 Actionable Recommendations

Prioritized by estimated impact on AI recommendation ranking • Based on 52 benchmark responses

P1

Close gap with sentry (4 losses)

HIGH

sentry beats you in 4 head-to-head scenarios. Their advantage: addressing source maps, session replay, serverless compatible.

Evidence
Error Tracking for Next.js App RouterAPM for Serverless Express on VercelError Tracking for Next.js App RouterAPM for Serverless Express on Vercel
source mapssession replayserverless compatible
vs Sentry
P1

Address "serverless compatible" to capture 2 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "serverless compatible" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
serverless compatible
vs Sentry
P2

Address "slack native workflow" to capture 4 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "slack native workflow" is required. This constraint appears in 4 benchmark prompts. incident-io addresses it 4× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
slack native workflow
vs incident.io
P2

Address "datadog sentry integration" to capture 4 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "datadog sentry integration" is required. This constraint appears in 4 benchmark prompts. incident-io addresses it 4× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
datadog sentry integration
vs incident.io
P2

Address "escalation policy" to capture 4 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "escalation policy" is required. This constraint appears in 4 benchmark prompts. incident-io addresses it 4× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
escalation policy
vs incident.io
Show 30 more recommendations
P2

Address "status page" to capture 4 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "status page" is required. This constraint appears in 4 benchmark prompts. incident-io addresses it 4× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
status page
vs incident.io
P2

Address "budget 500mo" to capture 4 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "budget 500mo" is required. This constraint appears in 4 benchmark prompts. incident-io addresses it 4× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
budget 500mo
vs incident.io
P2

Address "migrate from backstage" to capture 3 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "migrate from backstage" is required. This constraint appears in 3 benchmark prompts. opslevel addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
migrate from backstage
vs OpsLevelvs Cortex
P2

Address "managed saas" to capture 3 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "managed saas" is required. This constraint appears in 3 benchmark prompts. opslevel addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
managed saas
vs OpsLevelvs Cortex
P2

Address "import existing catalog" to capture 3 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "import existing catalog" is required. This constraint appears in 3 benchmark prompts. opslevel addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
import existing catalog
vs OpsLevelvs Cortex
P2

Address "scorecards" to capture 3 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "scorecards" is required. This constraint appears in 3 benchmark prompts. opslevel addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
scorecards
vs OpsLevelvs Cortex
P2

Address "no dedicated platform team" to capture 3 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "no dedicated platform team" is required. This constraint appears in 3 benchmark prompts. opslevel addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
no dedicated platform team
vs OpsLevelvs Cortex
P3

Improve 0% win rate in observability

MEDIUM

You're mentioned in 18 observability scenarios but only win 0. Analyze the constraints in losing scenarios for targeted improvements.

P3

Close gap with incident-io (4 losses)

MEDIUM

incident-io beats you in 4 head-to-head scenarios. Their advantage: addressing escalation policy, status page.

Evidence
On-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle SetupOn-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle SetupOn-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle SetupOn-Call Rotation and Incident Lifecycle Setup
escalation policystatus page
vs incident.io
P3

Improve 0% win rate in error monitoring

MEDIUM

You're mentioned in 4 error monitoring scenarios but only win 0. Analyze the constraints in losing scenarios for targeted improvements.

P3

Address "otlp grpc export" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "otlp grpc export" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. grafana addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
otlp grpc export
vs Grafanavs Honeycomb
P3

Address "pii scrubbing" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "pii scrubbing" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. grafana addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
pii scrubbing
vs Grafanavs Honeycomb
P3

Address "free tier 5m spans" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "free tier 5m spans" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. grafana addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
free tier 5m spans
vs Grafanavs Honeycomb
P3

Address "slo monitoring" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "slo monitoring" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. grafana addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
slo monitoring
vs Grafanavs Honeycomb
P3

Address "vendor neutral" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "vendor neutral" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. grafana addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
vendor neutral
vs Grafanavs Honeycomb
P3

Address "nextjs app router" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "nextjs app router" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
nextjs app router
vs Sentry
P3

Address "source maps" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "source maps" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
source maps
vs Sentry
P3

Address "session replay" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "session replay" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
session replay
vs Sentry
P3

Address "slack pagerduty alerts" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "slack pagerduty alerts" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
slack pagerduty alerts
vs Sentry
P3

Address "budget 30mo" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "budget 30mo" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
budget 30mo
vs Sentry
P3

Address "auto instrumentation" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "auto instrumentation" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
auto instrumentation
vs Sentry
P3

Address "small bundle size" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "small bundle size" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
small bundle size
vs Sentry
P3

Address "sentry integration" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "sentry integration" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. sentry addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
sentry integration
vs Sentry
P3

Address "soc2 type ii" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "soc2 type ii" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. aws-secrets-manager addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
soc2 type ii
vs AWS Secrets Manager
P3

Address "automated rotation 90d" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "automated rotation 90d" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. aws-secrets-manager addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
automated rotation 90d
vs AWS Secrets Manager
P3

Address "audit logging" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "audit logging" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. aws-secrets-manager addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
audit logging
vs AWS Secrets Manager
P3

Address "fine grained acl" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "fine grained acl" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. aws-secrets-manager addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
fine grained acl
vs AWS Secrets Manager
P3

Address "encryption at rest" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

Your win rate drops from 0% to 0% when "encryption at rest" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. aws-secrets-manager addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
encryption at rest
vs AWS Secrets Manager
P4

Expand into 3 new categories

LOW

You have zero presence in database, agent dev, ci cd. These categories have active benchmark prompts where competitors are being selected.

P4

Close gap with opslevel (2 losses)

LOW

opslevel beats you in 2 head-to-head scenarios. Their advantage: addressing import existing catalog, scorecards.

Evidence
Migrate from Backstage to Managed PortalMigrate from Backstage to Managed Portal
import existing catalogscorecards
vs OpsLevel