Session replay and heatmaps · November 2026 Edition
Hotjar vs LogRocket
Five of fourteen models named Hotjar first on the direct prompt; one named LogRocket. Both were named by all fourteen models and Hotjar carries 68 labels and LogRocket 37, so the shares are not directly comparable.
By Contentsquare, Paris, France, founded 2008. Named in nine categories this edition.
Named in three categories this edition.
First-choice share16%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate25%11%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#7A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels6837A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Hotjar reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Microsoft Clarity was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. Microsoft Clarity vs Hotjar · Microsoft Clarity vs LogRocket · Hotjar vs Dealfront
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the session replay and heatmaps page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
HotjarFirst choices, of fourteen modelsLogRocket
Direct51
Paraphrase101 against Hotjar
Comparative60
Budget-constrained003 against Hotjar
Scale-constrained203 against Hotjar
Negative0010 against Hotjar · 4 against LogRocket
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Hotjar and LogRocket were named in the same answer ninety-four times, of the 337 answers naming Hotjar and the 140 naming LogRocket. In those answers LogRocket took the first choice one time and Hotjar eighteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Hotjar and LogRocket stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | ||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | | | |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | | |||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | ||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | |||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | |
Hotjar LogRocket first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Hotjar on the left and LogRocket on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Hotjar and LogRocket stood in it.
Hotjar first, LogRocket an alternative
5 of 14 modelsLogRocket was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Hotjar, Mouseflow alternatives: Fullstory, Microsoft Clarity
Perplexity SonarHotjar alternatives: Amplitude Session Replay, Microsoft Clarity, Mouseflow
Grok 4.20Hotjar alternatives: Microsoft Clarity, Mouseflow
Mistral SmallHotjar alternatives: Fullstory, LogRocket, Microsoft Clarity, PostHog
DeepSeek V4 FlashHotjar alternatives: Amplitude Session Replay, Fullstory, LogRocket, Microsoft Clarity, Mouseflow
LogRocket first, Hotjar an alternative
1 of 14 modelsHotjar was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Qwen 3.7 FlashLogRocket alternatives: Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity, PostHog
Neither was the first choice, one was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniFullstory alternatives: Contentsquare, Glassbox, Hotjar, LogRocket
Gemini 3.5 FlashPostHog alternatives: Fullstory, Hotjar, LogRocket, Microsoft Clarity
Llama 4 MaverickMouseflow alternatives: Fullstory, Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity, UXCam
Kimi K2PostHog alternatives: LogRocket, Mouseflow
GLM 4.7 FlashXMicrosoft Clarity alternatives: Contentsquare, Glassbox, LogRocket, UXCam
MiniMax M2.5Microsoft Clarity alternatives: Fullstory, Hotjar, LogRocket
Muse Glimmer 30BFullstory alternatives: Contentsquare, Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity
Neither was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-6 LunaFullstory alternatives: Contentsquare, PostHog
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Hotjar leads by twelve points.
Hotjar12%#2 of 11LogRocket0%#8 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Hotjar2%#11 of 12LogRocket2%#7 of 12What the models said about Hotjar
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Very common but often criticized for broad data capture... Many privacy-focused users block it outright.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Named in active CIPA lawsuits; $5,000 statutory damages per violation possible under California law” Kimi K2 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Documented data exfiltration issues; research found it recorded content beyond input fields” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · hard negative
“Hotjar and Crazy Egg are the category leaders, with Hotjar suited for teams needing comprehensive user behavior analytics with strong heatmaps and session playback” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
“Hotjar: Strong all-in-one for product/UX teams. Excellent heatmaps, surveys, and easy replays. Great for non-technical users; affordable entry point.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Hotjar is the best balance of features, ease of use, and value.” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about LogRocket
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of six in this category shown.
“text masking beyond sensitive fields may require configuration; its ability to capture application state... increases the amount of potentially sensitive data collected” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“treat Hotjar, Microsoft Clarity, FullStory, Mouseflow, LogRocket and Smartlook as high-risk” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“More developer-focused; less intuitive for non-technical marketing teams; can be overkill” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“LogRocket is widely considered the gold standard for mid-market B2B.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Product & Developer Focus | FullStory, LogRocket | Heavy on console logs, network errors, quantitative analytics + replay.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · alternative
“One More Option Worth Considering: LogRocket (from $69/month) is excellent if your B2B product is primarily web-app focused” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · alternative
Also compared
Microsoft Clarity vs HotjarMicrosoft Clarity vs LogRocketHotjar vs DealfrontHotjar vs FullstoryHotjar vs PostHogHotjar vs MouseflowHotjar vs ContentsquareDealfront vs LogRocketFullstory vs LogRocketPostHog vs LogRocketMouseflow vs LogRocketLogRocket vs ContentsquareAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full session replay standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.