Interview scheduling · November 2026 Edition
ModernLoop vs Greenhouse
Eleven of fourteen models named ModernLoop first on the direct prompt; zero named Greenhouse. ModernLoop was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Greenhouse by thirteen and ModernLoop carries 42 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 share28%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate10%13%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#7A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels4223A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, ModernLoop reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.GoodTime was named alongside these two in eleven of the fourteen direct answers. ModernLoop vs Calendly · ModernLoop vs GoodTime · ModernLoop 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.
ModernLoopFirst choices, of fourteen modelsGreenhouse
Direct110
Paraphrase221 against Greenhouse
Comparative10
Budget-constrained004 against ModernLoop
Scale-constrained10
Negative102 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 ModernLoop 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 | | | | |
ModernLoop Greenhouse first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, ModernLoop on the left and Greenhouse on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where ModernLoop and Greenhouse stood in it.
ModernLoop first, Greenhouse an alternative
11 of 14 modelsGreenhouse was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5ModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, GoodTime, Prelude
Gemini 3.5 FlashModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, GoodTime, candidate.fyi
Grok 4.20ModernLoop alternatives: Grayscale, Prelude
DeepSeek V4 FlashModernLoop alternatives: Calendly
Llama 4 MaverickModernLoop alternatives: Calendly, GoodTime
Qwen 3.7 FlashCalendly, ModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime, Greenhouse, Lever
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
Neither was the first choice, one was named
3 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
Perplexity SonarGoodTime alternatives: Ashby, Cal.com, Lever, ModernLoop
Mistral SmallGoodTime alternatives: Calendly, ModernLoop, Paradox
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
Level: the same share of first choices.
ModernLoop0%#14 of 16Greenhouse0%#13 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
ModernLoop leads by twenty-four points.
ModernLoop28%#1 of 15Greenhouse4%#7 of 15Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
ModernLoop9%#3 of 13Greenhouse9%#4 of 13What the models said about ModernLoop
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid these for budgets: Tools like GoodTime, Ashby, Paradox, or ModernLoop” Grok 4.20 · budget prompt · hard negative
“recruiting-specific schedulers like GoodTime and ModernLoop are quote-only and usually mid-market to enterprise territory” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · soft negative
“instead of high-cost enterprise schedulers like GoodTime or ModernLoop” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“I'd recommend starting with a demo of ModernLoop. It offers the best balance of features, pricing flexibility, and mid-market focus.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
“Choose ModernLoop for structured hiring, interviewer utilization and technical recruiting workflows.” Muse Glimmer 30B · direct prompt · first choice
“ModernLoop offers the best balance of ATS integration depth, panel coordination, and automation” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Greenhouse
No label in this category carried a quote.
Also compared
ModernLoop vs CalendlyModernLoop vs GoodTimeModernLoop vs KoalendarModernLoop vs Cal.comModernLoop vs LeverModernLoop vs PreludeCalendly vs GreenhouseGoodTime vs GreenhouseKoalendar vs GreenhouseCal.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.