Four of fourteen models named HackerRank first on the direct prompt; seven named Codility. Both were named by all fourteen models and HackerRank carries 70 labels and Codility 58, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in four categories this edition.
Named in four categories this edition.
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 technical hiring assessments page.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, HackerRank and Codility were named in the same answer 222 times, of the 309 answers naming HackerRank and the 251 naming Codility. In those answers Codility took the first choice thirty-four times and HackerRank thirty-two.
| 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 |
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.
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of six in this category shown.
“Why Avoid the Giants? (HackerRank & Codility) ... often poor choices for *strictly* limited budgets” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“One of the most commonly complained-about platforms among developers.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“HackerRank when you need realistic, production-like engineering work. Its environment may use a proprietary coding agent rather than the candidate's normal tools” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“HackerRank (17% preference): Widely recognized for its robust coding assessments and support for many programming languages” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I'd generally recommend HackerRank if your main need is technical screening and structured coding interviews at scale” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, HackerRank offers the best balance of features and affordability” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of six in this category shown.
“Why Avoid the Giants? (HackerRank & Codility) ... often poor choices for *strictly* limited budgets” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“While these are industry standards, they carry specific complaints regarding *usability* and *relevance* rather than malice.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“significantly cheaper than enterprise-focused platforms like HackerRank or Codility (which start around $1,200+/year)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · soft negative
“Codility | Defensible hiring decisions; agentic AI coding | ~$1,200/yr (120 credits) | Strongest proctoring, VS Code env, Claude Code integration” DeepSeek V4 Flash · scale prompt · first choice
“Choose Codility if you need defensible, custom work-sample assessments, strong compliance/auditability and explicit coding-agent support.” Muse Glimmer 30B · comparative prompt · first choice
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Codility offers the best balance of assessment quality, pricing, and defensibility.” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
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.