HR AI Index

Index › Products › DevSkiller · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

DevSkiller

17Judge labels

0First choices

1Negative labels

8 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

9 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. DevSkiller was named 9 times in Technical hiring assessm, where HackerRank led with 28%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business15 of 59

under the label threshold

Mid-market14 of 52

under the label threshold

Enterprise12 of 38

under the label threshold

In technical hiring assessm · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named DevSkiller 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	0%	14 of 52	11%	9	under 10 labels · led by HackerRank at 28%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for DevSkiller 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 DevSkiller across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

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

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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative12 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative17 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Tech-heavy orgs needing interactive, role-specific coding: DevSkiller.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“For realistic job simulations: DevSkiller or CodeSignal” Kimi K2 · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“Want realistic tasks over puzzles: DevSkiller.” GPT-5.4 mini · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“realism (DevSkiller)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

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.

“Avoid for mid-market: ... full enterprise like DevSkiller (custom/heavy)” Grok 4.1 Fast · Technical hiring assessm · direct prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as DevSkiller, over the 17 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and DevSkiller was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HackerRank17 of 177Not among the top eight

Codility16 of 173Not among the top eight

CodeSignal14 of 173Not among the top eight

CoderPad13 of 172Not among the top eight

TestGorilla13 of 171Not among the top eight

Adaface5 of 171Not among the top eight

Karat4 of 170Not among the top eight

Woven4 of 170Not among the top eight

TestDome3 of 171Not among the top eight

CodeSubmit3 of 170Not 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 DevSkiller. 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 14 of the 17 answers that named DevSkiller and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

codility.com13

hackerrank.com10

codesignal.com8

codesubmit.io7

devskiller.comYour site7

gitnux.org7

wifitalents.com7

woventeams.com7

resources.trueability.com6

goodfit.so5

Seventy of the seventy-seven domain citations in answers naming DevSkiller came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

codility.com/how-to-choose-technical-assessment-platform11

devskiller.com/it/blog/technical-assessment-platforms7

woventeams.com/post/the-most-effective-technical-assessment-for-job-interviews7

gitnux.org/best/technical-assessment-software6

wifitalents.com/best/technical-assessment-software6

codesubmit.io/blog/coding-assessment-tools-20245

goodfit.so/guides/best-coding-assessment-platforms5

hackerrank.com/writing/best-coding-assessment-tools5

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Follow DevSkiller

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 DevSkiller'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 DevSkiller, 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 DevSkiller by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where DevSkiller 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 DevSkiller, 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 devskiller.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.