Small business▲+4Since September 2026: 9% → 13%, +4 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
13%from 9% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 5 → 4 of 60
5 categories · RankedHackerRank
271Judge labels
43First choices
65Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
5Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.7, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
51% in Technical hiring assessm for enterprise buyers
Rank 1 of 71 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
3 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 22% of its 64 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of HackerRank →By buyer segmentStrongest at enterprise.
Small business4 of 61
12%56 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market1 of 71
17%64 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise1 of 43
51%72 labels
endorsed leader
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 HackerRank 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 | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical hiring assessments | Talent acquisition | 17% | 1 of 71 | 22% | 64 | accepted challenger | ▼−12Since September 2026: 28% → 16%, −12 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Candidate assessment | Talent acquisition | 2% | 7 of 118 | 9% | 23 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Video interviewing | Talent acquisition | 0% | 16 of 66 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Spark Hire at 50% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Skills intelligence | Performance and talent management | 0% | 48 of 127 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Skills Base at 18% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Recruiting CRM and sourcing | Talent acquisition | 0% | 78 of 111 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Gem at 15% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. |
Movement
Since September 2026, HackerRank held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 13 points.
Best category · Technical hiring assessm · by segment
Mid-market▼−12Since September 2026: 28% → 16%, −12 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
16%from 28% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 1 pointRank 1 of 67, unchanged
Enterprise▲+7Since September 2026: 42% → 49%, +7 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
49%from 42% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 6 pointsRank 1 of 41, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical hiring assessm | 28% | 16% | ▼−12Since September 2026: 28% → 16%, −12 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 1 of 71, unchanged |
| Candidate assessment | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 12 → 7 of 118 |
| Video interviewing | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 19 → 16 of 66 |
| Skills intelligence | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 13-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 27 → 48 of 127 |
| Recruiting CRM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 78 of 111, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 13 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated HackerRank across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated HackerRank across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 8 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 5 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 11 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 7 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
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
Direct48 labels16
Paraphrase50 labels17
Comparative64 labels28not counted in share
Budget-constrained36 labels2
Scale-constrained28 labels8
Negative45 labels1not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative271 labels in all, every segment counted; 43 of the 72 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.
“used by 40% of Fortune 100 companies and is known for coding challenges, real-world project assessments... making it unmatched for engineering hiring” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · first choice
“Choose HackerRank or Codility if you are an enterprise needing rigorous automated screening with ironclad proctoring” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · first choice
“HackerRank if you are a large company hiring hundreds of developers and need a standardized process.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · first choice
“HackerRank is the best overall for mid-market to enterprise teams running high-volume technical hiring” Muse Glimmer 30B · Technical hiring assessm · direct 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.
“LeetCode-style algorithm challenge platforms (e.g., HackerRank, Codility, CodeSignal): While widely used, these are often criticized for not reflecting real-world job tasks” Mistral Small · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · hard negative
“HackerRank – Low Trustpilot score, no refund policy, no debugger, unreliable AI scoring.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · hard negative
“Avoid pricier ones like Codility/HackerRank ($150\u2013$249+/mo) unless scaling up.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Technical hiring assessm · budget prompt · hard negative
“HackerRank is powerful, but it's usually less budget-friendly for smaller teams” GPT-5.4 mini · Technical hiring assessm · budget prompt · hard negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as HackerRank, over the 271 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HackerRank was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as HackerRank, over the 271 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and HackerRank was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
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 HackerRank. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 248 of the 271 answers that named HackerRank and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
hackerrank.comYour site143
testgorilla.com96
codility.com87
selectsoftwarereviews.com86
g2.com78
codesignal.com73
testtrick.com68
testlify.com64
guideflow.com53
coderpad.io51
656 of the 799 domain citations in answers naming HackerRank came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where HackerRank stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where HackerRank stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “coding assessment platform”
4
Position for “technical assessment platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 33,100 a month (“hackerrank”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 1,116 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 58,699 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 7,505 · 638 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 23,753
- Paid Google search
- 1 searches its ads show for, about 3 clicks and $0 a month (estimate)
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
17%
rank 1 of 71 in technical hiring assessm
First choices
43
across its categories
- Named in
- 271 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 248 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on hackerrank.com
7,552
subdomains included
Content
1,261
counted in the table below
Documentation
1,058
Product · Integration
21 · 0
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 1,040 | 9 | 2026-08-05 | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 112 | 1 | 2026-07-17 | Technical hiring assessm | |
| Comparison | 45 | 1 | 2026-07-17 | Technical hiring assessm, Candidate assessment | |
| Report or ebook | 30 | 0 | 2025-10-01 | ||
| Template or tool | 10 | 0 | 2025-03-13 | ||
| Case study | 9 | 0 | 2025-09-01 | ||
| Webinar or virtual event | 7 | 0 | 2025-03-13 | ||
| Conference or event | 7 | 0 | 2025-03-13 | ||
| News or press | 1 | 0 | 2022-04-06 |
Most recent
- 2026-08-05How chakra by hackerrank works blog
- 2026-08-05The New Technical Hiring Bar: CS Fundamentals, AI Fluency, and Judgment - HackerRank Blog blog
- 2026-07-29Is leetcode dead blog
- 2026-07-29How to test ai fluency in developer candidates blog
- 2026-07-29How to interview engineers who use ai coding assistants blog
- 2026-07-29How hackerrank is rebuilding developer hiring for the agentic era blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page hackerrank.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as HackerRank
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as HackerRank; a claim can dispute any of them.
HackerRank Developer Skills Platform 1HackerRank Starter 1
Follow HackerRank
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.
The company
HackerRank is its own company.ShowHide
The company
HackerRank is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Hire for the Agentic Era
- For
- companies
- Price stated
- HackerRank offers both monthly and annual subscription plans for purchase online. hackerrank.com/about-us/pricing-terms
- Free plan or trial
- Start a free trial hackerrank.com
- Certifications
- Certified Assessments
- Customers named
- DaughertyJuniperAtlassianIBMSprout SocialUKGNubankSoFi
- Not stated on the pages read
- Starting price, integrations, hosting
What HackerRank's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: hackerrank.com, hackerrank.com/about-us/pricing-terms, hackerrank.com/products/engage, hackerrank.com/customers, hackerrank.com/partners. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 HackerRank'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 HackerRank, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for HackerRank by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where HackerRank 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 HackerRank, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where HackerRank is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where HackerRank is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideAI models recommend HackerRank first in Technical hiring assessments this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.