Every category where a model named Codility for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Technical hiring assessments	Talent acquisition	5%	7 of 52	32%	44	criticized challenger
Candidate assessment	Talent acquisition	0%	13 of 100	12%	17	accepted challenger
Skills intelligence	Performance and talent management	0%	34 of 161	0%	4	under 10 labels · led by TalentGuard at 19%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Codility yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Codility across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	3	0	3
GPT-5.4 mini	0	3	1	2	6
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	4	3	7
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	3	0	3
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	3	2	3	8
Mistral Small	1	0	2	0	3
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	4	1	1	6
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	4	0	4
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	2	1	0	4
Kimi K2	2	2	3	2	9
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	4	6
MiniMax M2.5	2	2	1	1	6

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct29 labels4

Paraphrase26 labels1

Comparative59 labels7not counted in share

Budget-constrained20 labels3

Scale-constrained24 labels2

Negative28 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative186 labels in all, every segment counted; 10 of the 18 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Codility (structured, automated grading) or HackerEarth (large question bank, strong analytics).” MiniMax M2.5 · Candidate assessment · comparative prompt · first choice

“Tools like TestDome, Codility (for coders) ... are generally well-regarded when used correctly” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Candidate assessment · negative prompt · first choice

“Codility offers the best balance of capability, reputation, and price” Kimi K2 · Technical hiring assessm · direct prompt · first choice

“Often ranked as the best overall, especially for enterprise use.” Mistral Small · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · first choice

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“it is often described as "quite pricey" ... Codility has had issues with "test integrity," where questions and answers are not sufficiently hidden from recruiters” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · hard negative

“Opaque scoring: Candidates and reviewers criticize edge-case scoring and lack of transparency” MiniMax M2.5 · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · hard negative

“Why we recommend avoiding HackerRank or Codility (for now)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Technical hiring assessm · paraphrase prompt · hard negative

“like HackerRank or Codility when using generic public questions) are easily solved by modern generative AI models” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Candidate assessment · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Codility, over the 186 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Codility was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HackerRank163 of 18634Compare →

TestGorilla100 of 18625Compare →

CodeSignal100 of 18612Compare →

CoderPad87 of 18618Compare →

Criteria Corp43 of 1863Not among the top eight

Mercer | Mettl35 of 1862Not among the top eight

iMocha32 of 1863Not among the top eight

HireVue29 of 1863Not among the top eight

Coderbyte26 of 1869Compare →

Vervoe24 of 1862Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Codility. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 157 of the 186 answers that named Codility and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hackerrank.com80

codility.comYour site76

codesignal.com59

testlify.com57

codesubmit.io53

testgorilla.com50

testtrick.com49

selectsoftwarereviews.com48

g2.com46

goodfit.so38

480 of the 556 domain citations in answers naming Codility came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

codility.com/how-to-choose-technical-assessment-platform61

hackerrank.com/writing/best-coding-assessment-tools56

codesubmit.io/blog/coding-assessment-tools-202440

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/online-coding-interview-tools39

goodfit.so/guides/best-coding-assessment-platforms36

augmentcode.com/tools/best-coding-assessment-tools-enterprise34

codesignal.com/blog/5-coding-assessment-platforms-for-your-technical-hiring31

bryq.com/blog/best-talent-assessment-platforms-202623

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Codility

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Codility; a claim can dispute any of them.

Codility Starter 1

Follow Codility

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Codility's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Codility, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

With a new claim: the vendor brief

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Codility by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Codility is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name Codility, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at codility.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.