Interview scheduling · November 2026 Edition
Koalendar vs Greenhouse
Zero of fourteen models named Koalendar first on the direct prompt; zero named Greenhouse. Koalendar was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Greenhouse by thirteen and Koalendar carries 19 labels and Greenhouse 23, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in fourteen categories this edition.
First-choice share10%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate11%13%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#7A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels1923A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Koalendar 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 Koalendar · ModernLoop vs Greenhouse · 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.
KoalendarFirst choices, of fourteen modelsGreenhouse
Direct00
Paraphrase021 against Greenhouse
Comparative00
Budget-constrained50
Scale-constrained00
Negative002 against Koalendar · 2 against Greenhouse
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 Koalendar and Greenhouse 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 | |
Koalendar Greenhouse first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Koalendar on the left and Greenhouse on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Koalendar and Greenhouse stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.GPT-5.4 miniGoodTime alternatives: Ashby, Calendly, Greenhouse, Lever
Qwen 3.7 FlashCalendly, ModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime, Greenhouse, Lever
Neither was named
12 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5ModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, GoodTime, Prelude
Gemini 3.5 FlashModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, GoodTime, candidate.fyi
Perplexity SonarGoodTime alternatives: Ashby, Cal.com, Lever, ModernLoop
Grok 4.20ModernLoop alternatives: Grayscale, Prelude
Mistral SmallGoodTime alternatives: Calendly, ModernLoop, Paradox
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
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
Koalendar leads by fifteen points.
Koalendar15%#2 of 16Greenhouse0%#13 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
Koalendar leads by six points.
Koalendar10%#4 of 15Greenhouse4%#7 of 15Enterprise
The order flips: Greenhouse leads at enterprise.
Greenhouse9%#4 of 13Koalendar0%#– of 13What the models said about Koalendar
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Lack enterprise features like audit trails, SSO, or robust integrations—avoid for scaled hiring due to reliability gaps.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · hard negative
“General-purpose schedulers such as Calendly, Cal.com, Koalendar, or YouCanBookMe: ... verify panel coordination” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Koalendar is widely considered the best option for strict budget constraints because it offers a completely free plan with no time limits.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“Often cited as the best genuinely free scheduler... Zero Budget: Use Koalendar” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“For most companies with a limited budget, I'd start with Koalendar.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Greenhouse
No label in this category carried a quote.
Also compared
ModernLoop vs KoalendarModernLoop vs GreenhouseCalendly vs KoalendarCalendly vs GreenhouseGoodTime vs KoalendarGoodTime vs GreenhouseKoalendar vs Cal.comKoalendar vs LeverKoalendar vs PreludeCal.com vs GreenhouseLever vs GreenhouseGreenhouse 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.