Infrastructure monitoring · November 2026 Edition
LogicMonitor vs New Relic
Three of fourteen models named LogicMonitor first on the direct prompt; one named New Relic. LogicMonitor was named by eleven of the fourteen models and New Relic by fourteen and LogicMonitor carries 25 labels and New Relic 49, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in seven categories this edition.
Named in nine categories this edition.
First-choice share10%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate4%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#6A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels2549A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, LogicMonitor reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Datadog was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Datadog vs LogicMonitor · Datadog vs New Relic · Zabbix vs LogicMonitor
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 infrastructure monitoring page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
LogicMonitorFirst choices, of fourteen modelsNew Relic
Direct311 against LogicMonitor · 1 against New Relic
Paraphrase21
Comparative01
Budget-constrained00
Scale-constrained01
Negative005 against New Relic
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.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where LogicMonitor and New Relic 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 | | | |
LogicMonitor New Relic first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, LogicMonitor on the left and New Relic on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where LogicMonitor and New Relic stood in it.
LogicMonitor first, New Relic an alternative
3 of 14 modelsNew Relic was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Perplexity SonarLogicMonitor alternatives: Better Stack, Datadog, Netdata, Zabbix
DeepSeek V4 FlashLogicMonitor alternatives: New Relic, Paessler PRTG, Site24x7
GLM 4.7 FlashXLogicMonitor alternatives: Datadog, New Relic
New Relic first, LogicMonitor an alternative
1 of 14 modelsLogicMonitor was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Muse Glimmer 30BDatadog, New Relic alternatives: LogicMonitor, ManageEngine OpManager, Prometheus + Grafana, Site24x7, Zabbix
Neither was the first choice, one was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniDatadog alternatives: Grafana, New Relic
Gemini 3.5 FlashGrafana alternatives: Better Stack, LogicMonitor, New Relic
Grok 4.20Datadog alternatives: Motadata ObserveOps, New Relic, NinjaOne, Prometheus + Grafana, Site24x7, Zabbix
Qwen 3.7 FlashDatadog alternatives: Checkmk, LogicMonitor, Site24x7, Zabbix
MiniMax M2.5Site24x7 alternatives: Datadog, LogicMonitor, NinjaOne
GPT-6 LunaDatadog alternatives: Dynatrace, Grafana, New Relic
Neither was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
Mistral SmallDatadog alternatives: Middleware.io, NinjaOne, Zabbix
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2Site24x7 alternatives: Coralogix, Motadata ObserveOps, Paessler PRTG, Zabbix
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
New Relic leads by twelve points.
New Relic12%#3 of 16LogicMonitor0%#– of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: LogicMonitor leads at mid-market.
LogicMonitor10%#4 of 16New Relic6%#6 of 16Enterprise
The order flips: New Relic leads at enterprise.
New Relic4%#4 of 14LogicMonitor2%#5 of 14What the models said about LogicMonitor
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“SaaS-based with strong hybrid infrastructure support, though pricing is more enterprise-oriented.” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · soft negative
“I recommend LogicMonitor or Datadog, depending on your technical maturity and budget.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about New Relic
No label in this category carried a quote.
Also compared
Datadog vs LogicMonitorDatadog vs New RelicZabbix vs LogicMonitorZabbix vs New RelicSite24x7 vs LogicMonitorSite24x7 vs New RelicLogicMonitor vs GrafanaLogicMonitor vs Prometheus + GrafanaLogicMonitor vs PrometheusGrafana vs New RelicNew Relic vs Prometheus + GrafanaNew Relic vs PrometheusAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full infra monitoring 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.