Vendor Observatory

Revealed Preference

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

PlanetScale

planetscale.com🗄 Database
ProfileAI-ReadinessTrendCategoriesConstraintsCompetitiveScenariosRecommendations

Recommendation Profile

Primary Recommendations

0

Total Mentions

18

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

18(+0 vs prior)

Weekly Activity

1 week of data

Category Breakdown

CategoryRecommendedComparedRejectedTotalWin Rate
🗄 Database-2-150%
unknown---30%

Constraint Scorecard

✗ Constraints When Vendor Lost

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

staging prod separation13×
eu data residency8×
branch per pr7×
real postgres7×
pitr7×
soc26×
escape hatch6×
multi tenant rls6×
audit logs6×
serverless compatible2×
pgvector required2×
pitr backups2×

Competitive Landscape

CompetitorWins Over YouScenarios
Neon4Serverless Postgres with Connection Pooling, Database Branching for Preview Environments

Head-to-Head: PlanetScale vs Neon

PlanetScale: 0 wins
Neon: 4 wins
Ties: 12
Database Branching for Preview Environments
Serverless Postgres with Connection Pooling→ Neon
Database Branching for Preview Environments
Serverless Postgres with Connection Pooling→ Neon
Database Branching for Preview Environments
Database Branching for Preview Environments→ Neon
Database Branching for Preview Environments→ Neon
db-open-01
B2B Backend-as-a-Service with RLS and Auth
Database Branching for Preview Environments
B2B Backend-as-a-Service with RLS and Auth
Database Branching for Preview Environments
B2B Backend-as-a-Service with RLS and Auth
B2B Backend-as-a-Service with RLS and Auth
db-open-01
db-open-02

✗ Scenarios Lost (4)

Serverless Postgres with Connection Pooling→ lost to Neon
Serverless Postgres with Connection Pooling→ lost to Neon
Database Branching for Preview Environments→ lost to Neon
Database Branching for Preview Environments→ lost to Neon

🎯 Actionable Recommendations

Prioritized by estimated impact on AI recommendation ranking • Based on 18 benchmark responses

P1

Close gap with neon (4 losses)

HIGH

neon beats you in 4 head-to-head scenarios. Their advantage: addressing serverless compatible, pgvector required, eu data residency.

Evidence
Serverless Postgres with Connection PoolingServerless Postgres with Connection PoolingDatabase Branching for Preview EnvironmentsDatabase Branching for Preview Environments
serverless compatiblepgvector requiredeu data residencypitr backupsbranch per prpitr
vs Neon
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. neon addresses it 2× in winning scenarios.

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
serverless compatible
vs Neon
P3

Improve 0% win rate in database

MEDIUM

You're mentioned in 15 database scenarios but only win 0. Analyze the constraints in losing scenarios for targeted improvements.

P3

Address "pgvector required" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
pgvector required
vs Neon
P3

Address "eu data residency" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
eu data residency
vs Neon
Show 5 more recommendations
P3

Address "pitr backups" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
pitr backups
vs Neon
P3

Address "branch per pr" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
branch per pr
vs Neon
P3

Address "real postgres" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
real postgres
vs Neon
P3

Address "staging prod separation" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
staging prod separation
vs Neon
P3

Address "pitr" to capture 2 additional scenarios

MEDIUM

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

Evidence
Win rate impact: 0% → 0% (delta: +0%)
pitr
vs Neon