Vendor Observatory

Revealed Preference

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

Grafana

grafana.com📊 Observability
ProfileAI-ReadinessTrendCategoriesConstraintsCompetitiveScenariosRecommendations

Recommendation Profile

Primary Recommendations

1

Total Mentions

25

Win Rate

4%

Implementation Rate

0%

codex_cli: 1

AI-Readiness Score

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

20
Grade: D

out of 100

Implementation Rate(30%)0/100

How often AI writes code after recommending

Win Rate(20%)4/100

How often selected as primary choice

Constraint Coverage(20%)1/100

% of prompt constraints addressed

Gotcha Avoidance(15%)100/100

Fewer gotchas = more AI-friendly

Cross-Platform(15%)30/100

Consistency across assistants

Trend

Win Rate Trend

→+0%

4% → 4%

Mention Volume

25(+0 vs prior)

Weekly Activity

1 week of data

Category Breakdown

CategoryRecommendedComparedRejectedTotalWin Rate
📊 Observability12-166%
🔀 Cross-Category---20%
📖 Developer Portal---40%
unknown---30%

Constraint Scorecard

✓ Constraints Addressed

pii scrubbing1×

✗ Constraints When Vendor Lost

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

otlp grpc export7×
pii scrubbing7×
free tier 5m spans7×
slo monitoring7×
vendor neutral7×
managed platform6×
free tier6×
aws compatible6×
slack alerting6×
small team6×
github integration4×
pagerduty integration4×
incremental adoption4×
self serve4×
kubernetes ok4×
soc2 ready2×
budget 200mo2×
solo founder2×
saml enterprise2×
low maintenance2×
serverless compatible2×
auto instrumentation2×
small bundle size2×
sentry integration2×

Competitive Landscape

CompetitorWins Over YouScenarios
New Relic1Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
Backstage1Service Catalog for 50 Microservices
Honeycomb1Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger
PagerDuty1Service Catalog for 50 Microservices

Head-to-Head: Grafana vs New Relic

Grafana: 0 wins
New Relic: 1 win
Ties: 11
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS→ New Relic
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
obs-open-01
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
APM for Serverless Express on Vercel
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
APM for Serverless Express on Vercel
Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger
obs-open-01

✓ Scenarios Won (1)

Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger📊 Observability

✗ Scenarios Lost (4)

Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS→ lost to New Relic
Service Catalog for 50 Microservices→ lost to Backstage
Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger→ lost to Honeycomb
Service Catalog for 50 Microservices→ lost to PagerDuty

🎯 Actionable Recommendations

Prioritized by estimated impact on AI recommendation ranking • Based on 25 benchmark responses

P2

Address "github integration" to capture 2 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 4% to 0% when "github integration" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. backstage addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 4% (delta: +4%)
github integration
vs Backstagevs PagerDuty
P2

Address "pagerduty integration" to capture 2 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 4% to 0% when "pagerduty integration" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. backstage addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 4% (delta: +4%)
pagerduty integration
vs Backstagevs PagerDuty
P2

Address "incremental adoption" to capture 2 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 4% to 0% when "incremental adoption" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. backstage addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 4% (delta: +4%)
incremental adoption
vs Backstagevs PagerDuty
P2

Address "self serve" to capture 2 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 4% to 0% when "self serve" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. backstage addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 4% (delta: +4%)
self serve
vs Backstagevs PagerDuty
P2

Address "kubernetes ok" to capture 2 additional scenarios

HIGH

Your win rate drops from 4% to 0% when "kubernetes ok" is required. This constraint appears in 2 benchmark prompts. backstage addresses it 1× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 4% (delta: +4%)
kubernetes ok
vs Backstagevs PagerDuty
Show 5 more recommendations
P3

Improve 6% win rate in observability

MEDIUM

You're mentioned in 16 observability scenarios but only win 1. Analyze the constraints in losing scenarios for targeted improvements.

P3

Improve 0% win rate in developer portal

MEDIUM

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

P4

Close gap with new-relic (1 loss)

LOW

new-relic beats you in 1 head-to-head scenario. Their advantage: addressing free tier.

Evidence
Full-Stack Observability for Express on ECS
free tier
vs New Relic
P4

Close gap with backstage (1 loss)

LOW

backstage beats you in 1 head-to-head scenario. Their advantage: addressing github integration, pagerduty integration, incremental adoption.

Evidence
Service Catalog for 50 Microservices
github integrationpagerduty integrationincremental adoption
vs Backstage
P4

Close gap with honeycomb (1 loss)

LOW

honeycomb beats you in 1 head-to-head scenario.

Evidence
Managed OTel Backend Replacing Self-Hosted Jaeger
vs Honeycomb