Calendly vs Cal.com
Three of fourteen models named Calendly first on the direct prompt; one named Cal.com. Calendly was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Cal.com by ten and Calendly carries 55 labels and Cal.com 21, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in seven categories this edition.
Named in two 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 interview scheduling page.
By framing
CalendlyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsCal.com
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Calendly and Cal.com were named in the same answer seventy-one times, of the 249 answers naming Calendly and the 83 naming Cal.com. In those answers Cal.com took the first choice eleven times and Calendly twenty-two.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | |||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | ||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | | |
| 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 | | | |
Calendly Cal.com first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Calendly on the left and Cal.com on the right.The direct prompt
Both were the first choice
1 of 14 modelsThe answer named them together, and the judge labeled each a first choice.Calendly first, Cal.com not the choice
2 of 14 modelsCal.com was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Calendly41%#1 of 15Cal.com3%#6 of 15What the models said about Calendly
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.
“Avoid using general-purpose tools (like Doodle or basic free tiers of Calendly) for serious hiring workflows” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“Calendly (Specifically for large Enterprise/Tech sectors): ... it is notably banned by Amazon for employee use. This is due to concerns over data leakage” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Calendly - Very popular and widely used. Has a free tier for basic use... For very small teams (1-5 people): Calendly's free plan or BizBot's free tier should suffice” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Most companies with limited budgets start with Calendly's free plan and upgrade only when they need team scheduling features” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“1. Calendly - Best for: Sales teams, recruiters, consultants, and anyone needing to schedule 1:1 or team meetings.” Mistral Small · comparative prompt · first choice
What the models said about Cal.com
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“If you want a modern standalone tool for $0: Go with Cal.com (to create multiple interview types for free)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Calendly’s free plan or Cal.com’s free/low-cost tier, because both cover basic scheduling” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
“Calendly (free) or Cal.com (free tier) | Instant set‑up, embeddable links, zero cost” MiniMax M2.5 · comparative 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.