Interview scheduling · November 2026 Edition
Calendly vs GoodTime
One of fourteen models named Calendly first on the direct prompt; three named GoodTime. Both were named by all fourteen models and Calendly carries 59 labels and GoodTime 54, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in five categories this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share16%12%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate29%22%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#3A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels5954A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Calendly reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.ModernLoop was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. ModernLoop vs Calendly · ModernLoop vs GoodTime · Calendly vs Koalendar
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 interview scheduling page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
CalendlyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsGoodTime
Direct136 against Calendly · 2 against GoodTime
Paraphrase131 against Calendly · 2 against GoodTime
Comparative241 against Calendly
Budget-constrained606 against GoodTime
Scale-constrained001 against Calendly
Negative018 against Calendly · 2 against GoodTime
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, Calendly and GoodTime were named in the same answer 129 times, of the 232 answers naming Calendly and the 166 naming GoodTime. In those answers GoodTime took the first choice forty-five times and Calendly twenty-nine.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Calendly and GoodTime 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 | | | | |
Calendly GoodTime first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Calendly on the left and GoodTime on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Calendly and GoodTime stood in it.
Calendly first, GoodTime an alternative
1 of 14 modelsGoodTime was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Qwen 3.7 FlashCalendly, ModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime, Greenhouse, Lever
GoodTime first, Calendly an alternative
3 of 14 modelsCalendly was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniGoodTime alternatives: Ashby, Calendly, Greenhouse, Lever
Perplexity SonarGoodTime alternatives: Ashby, Cal.com, Lever, ModernLoop
Mistral SmallGoodTime alternatives: Calendly, ModernLoop, Paradox
Neither was the first choice, one was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5ModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, GoodTime, Prelude
Gemini 3.5 FlashModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, GoodTime, candidate.fyi
DeepSeek V4 FlashModernLoop alternatives: Calendly
Llama 4 MaverickModernLoop alternatives: Calendly, GoodTime
Kimi K2ModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime
GLM 4.7 FlashXModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime, Grayscale
MiniMax M2.5ModernLoop alternatives: Cal.com, GoodTime, VidCruiter
GPT-6 LunaModernLoop alternatives: Ashby's native scheduling, GoodTime
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Grok 4.20ModernLoop alternatives: Grayscale, Prelude
Muse Glimmer 30BModernLoop alternatives: Grayscale, Prelude
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
Calendly leads by forty-eight points.
Calendly50%#1 of 16GoodTime2%#7 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
The order flips: GoodTime leads at enterprise.
GoodTime55%#1 of 13Calendly2%#8 of 13What the models said about Calendly
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“General-purpose tools like Calendly and Microsoft Bookings lack the ATS depth and interviewer load balancing that recruiting teams need at scale.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · hard negative
“Standard tools like basic Calendly often fail because they struggle with complex panel logic and deep ATS synchronization.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Why to avoid: It lacks deep ATS integration and compliance features required for enterprise recruiting.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Calendly is the industry standard for a reason. It is the easiest tool to set up and requires the least amount of training” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“Calendly is considered a budget-friendly option, with a free plan and paid plans starting at $10 to $16 per seat a month.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
“the best starting point is usually Calendly because it has a free plan and low-cost paid tiers” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about GoodTime
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“What to Avoid - Enterprise-focused tools like GoodTime, VidCruiter, or Paradox” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid these for budgets: Tools like GoodTime, Ashby, Paradox, or ModernLoop” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid GoodTime (unless you're enterprise and test heavily)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“If you already have an ATS (like Greenhouse/Lever): Add GoodTime. It saves hiring managers significantly more time than Calendly” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“GoodTime for most mid-market B2B teams that take hiring seriously and want a scalable recruiting workflow.” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
“Highly rated for mid-market and enterprise use, especially for structured, multi-stage hiring processes” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
ModernLoop vs CalendlyModernLoop vs GoodTimeCalendly vs KoalendarCalendly vs Cal.comCalendly vs LeverCalendly vs GreenhouseCalendly vs PreludeGoodTime vs KoalendarGoodTime vs Cal.comGoodTime vs LeverGoodTime vs GreenhouseGoodTime vs PreludeAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full interview scheduling 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.