Geneo Logo
Geneo

real-time IoT data processing platform comparison

commercialSoftware & SaaSAnalyzed 07/23/2025

AI Search Visibility Analysis

Analyze how brands appear across multiple AI search platforms for a specific prompt

Prompt Report Analysis Visualization
High Impact

Total Mentions

Total number of times a brand appears

across all AI platforms for this prompt

Reach

Platform Presence

Number of AI platforms where the brand

was mentioned for this prompt

Authority

Linkbacks

Number of times brand website was

linked in AI responses

Reputation

Sentiment

Overall emotional tone when brand is

mentioned (Positive/Neutral/Negative)

Brand Performance Across AI Platforms

3
Platforms Covered
16
Brands Found
86
Total Mentions
BRANDTOTAL MENTIONSPLATFORM PRESENCELINKBACKSSENTIMENTSCORE
1Microsoft Azure
17
0
95
2AWS
13
0
89
3Google Cloud
10
0
84
4IBM Watson
6
0
67
5InfluxDB
5
1
67
6Kaa
4
1
66
7ThingSpeak
6
0
65
8ThingsBoard
6
0
63
9QuestDB
4
0
60
10Oracle
3
0
58
11Bosch
3
0
58
12Siemens
3
0
58
13Estuary
3
0
58
14Apache Kafka
1
0
55
15Apache IoTDB
1
0
55
16Apache Flink
1
0
55
Referenced Domains Analysis
All 31 domains referenced across AI platforms for this prompt
ChatGPT
Perplexity
Google AIO
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
2
2
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
1
Google AIO:
0
1
ChatGPT:
0
Perplexity:
0
Google AIO:
1
1

Strategic Insights & Recommendations

Dominant Brand

AWS IoT Core emerges as the most frequently recommended platform across all responses, praised for its scalability, security, and comprehensive AWS ecosystem integration.

Platform Gap

ChatGPT provides the most technical depth with open-source options like Apache Kafka and Flink, while Perplexity offers the most structured comparison with specific use case recommendations.

Link Opportunity

There's a significant opportunity to create detailed implementation guides and cost comparison tools for these IoT platforms, as all responses mention complexity and pricing as key decision factors.

Key Takeaways for This Prompt

AWS IoT Core, Azure IoT Hub, and Google Cloud IoT Core are consistently ranked as top enterprise-grade solutions across all platforms.

Open-source alternatives like Apache Kafka, ThingsBoard, and Kaa IoT offer high customization but require more technical expertise.

Time-series databases like InfluxDB and QuestDB are specifically optimized for high-velocity IoT sensor data processing.

Platform selection should prioritize scalability, integration capabilities, security features, and alignment with existing infrastructure and team expertise.

AI Search Engine Responses

Compare how different AI search engines respond to this query

ChatGPT

5822 Characters

BRAND (10)

AWS
IBM Watson
Google Cloud
Apache Kafka
Microsoft Azure
InfluxDB
Apache IoTDB
Apache Flink
Kaa
ThingSpeak

SUMMARY

ChatGPT provides a comprehensive comparison of 10 real-time IoT data processing platforms, covering AWS IoT Core, Azure IoT Hub, Google Cloud IoT Core, IBM Watson IoT, Apache Kafka, Apache Flink, InfluxDB, ThingSpeak, Kaa IoT Platform, and Apache IoTDB. Each platform is analyzed for key features, pros, and cons, with emphasis on scalability, security, integration capabilities, and real-time analytics. The response highlights that platform selection should consider project requirements, scalability needs, integration requirements, security considerations, and team technical expertise.

Perplexity

7674 Characters

BRAND (12)

AWS
IBM Watson
Google Cloud
Bosch
Microsoft Azure
Siemens
InfluxDB
QuestDB
Estuary
Kaa
ThingSpeak
ThingsBoard

SUMMARY

Perplexity delivers a detailed comparative analysis using a structured table format, comparing 11 platforms including AWS IoT Core, Azure IoT Hub, Google Cloud IoT, IBM Watson IoT, InfluxDB Cloud, QuestDB Cloud, Estuary, ThingsBoard, ThingSpeak, Siemens Insights Hub, and Bosch IoT Suite. The analysis covers key strengths, data ingestion capabilities, scalability, typical use cases, and target customers. It provides specific recommendations based on different use cases and highlights emerging trends like edge computing and AI/ML integration.

Google AIO

2191 Characters

BRAND (4)

Oracle
AWS
Google Cloud
Microsoft Azure

SUMMARY

Google AIO focuses on the core capabilities of real-time IoT data processing platforms, emphasizing device connectivity, data ingestion, analytics, and machine learning features. It highlights AWS IoT Core, Azure IoT, Google Cloud IoT, and Oracle IoT as key platforms, discussing their strengths in device management, security, and data analytics. The response emphasizes the importance of considering specific application requirements, existing infrastructure, and cost-scalability factors when selecting a platform.

REFERENCES (24)

Share Report

Share this AI visibility analysis report with others through social media

Real-Time IoT Data Processing Platform Comparison 2024 | Geneo