Candidate assessment · November 2026 Edition
EmployTest vs HackerRank
Zero of fourteen models named EmployTest first on the direct prompt; one named HackerRank. EmployTest was named by eleven of the fourteen models and HackerRank by fourteen and EmployTest carries 15 labels and HackerRank 41, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in four categories this edition.
First-choice share4%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%7%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#5A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels1541A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, EmployTest reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.TestGorilla was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. TestGorilla vs EmployTest · TestGorilla vs HackerRank · Criteria Corp vs EmployTest
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 candidate assessment page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
EmployTestFirst choices, of fourteen modelsHackerRank
Direct01
Paraphrase001 against HackerRank
Comparative02
Budget-constrained201 against HackerRank
Scale-constrained00
Negative001 against HackerRank
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 EmployTest and HackerRank 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 | | | | |
EmployTest HackerRank first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, EmployTest on the left and HackerRank on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where EmployTest and HackerRank stood in it.
HackerRank first, EmployTest not the choice
1 of 14 modelsEmployTest was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Mistral SmallCodility, HackerRank alternatives: TestGorilla, Thomas International
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.DeepSeek V4 FlashTestGorilla alternatives: Canditech, Codility, Criteria Corp, HackerRank
Llama 4 MaverickThomas International alternatives: Codility, EmployTest, HackerRank, Weirdly
Qwen 3.7 FlashTestGorilla alternatives: HackerRank, PI Online, Spark Hire, Vervoe
Kimi K2TestGorilla alternatives: Codility, Criteria Corp, HackerRank, HireVue, Vervoe
MiniMax M2.5Prevue HR, TestGorilla alternatives: Codility, Criteria Corp, HackerRank, HireVue
Muse Glimmer 30BCodility, Thomas alternatives: HackerRank, HireVue, Weirdly
Neither was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Criteria Corp, Harver, Plum alternatives: JobCannon, SHL, TestGorilla, Vervoe, Wonderlic
GPT-5.4 miniCriteria Corp alternatives: HighMatch, TestGorilla, Testlify, The Predictive Index
Gemini 3.5 FlashTestGorilla alternatives: Criteria Corp, The Predictive Index, Vervoe
Perplexity SonarCriteria Corp alternatives: Codility, TestGorilla, Vervoe
Grok 4.20Criteria Corp alternatives: Harver, TestGorilla, Thomas International
GLM 4.7 FlashXTestGorilla alternatives: Criteria Corp, HireVue, Thomas International
GPT-6 LunaCriteria Corp alternatives: TestGorilla
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
EmployTest leads by four points.
EmployTest4%#3 of 11HackerRank0%#7 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
EmployTest leads by two points.
EmployTest4%#4 of 12HackerRank2%#5 of 12Enterprise
The order flips: HackerRank leads at enterprise.
HackerRank2%#8 of 12EmployTest0%#– of 12What the models said about EmployTest
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“EmployTest offers the most financial flexibility if you only test a few candidates per year” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“start with Toggl Hire's free plan or EmployTest for low-cost per-test pricing” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
“If you particularly dislike subscription commitments, EmployTest's pay-per-test model is your best bet.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · alternative
What the models said about HackerRank
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.
“Many AI hiring models specifically recommend avoiding HackerRank for small businesses” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“If you are hiring engineers exclusively: Go with HackerRank for speed/volume or Codility for rigorous project-based verification.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
TestGorilla vs EmployTestTestGorilla vs HackerRankCriteria Corp vs EmployTestCriteria Corp vs HackerRankCodility vs EmployTestCodility vs HackerRankEmployTest vs CodeSignalEmployTest vs HarverHackerRank vs CodeSignalHackerRank vs HarverAll twenty-one head-to-head pages and the full candidate assessment 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.