Interview scheduling · September 2026 Edition
ModernLoop vs Workable
Five of twelve models named ModernLoop first on the direct prompt; zero named Workable. ModernLoop was named by eleven of the twelve models and Workable by ten and ModernLoop carries 29 labels and Workable 12, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in nine categories this edition.
First-choice share15%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate10%8%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#8A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels2912A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, ModernLoop reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Lever was named alongside these two in nine of the twelve direct answers. Calendly vs ModernLoop · Calendly vs Workable · ModernLoop vs Greenhouse
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve 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
How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
ModernLoopFirst choices, of twelve modelsWorkable
Direct50
Paraphrase12
Comparative00
Budget-constrained001 against ModernLoop · 1 against Workable
Scale-constrained20
Negative102 against ModernLoop
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.
Every model, every framing
The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where ModernLoop and Workable stood in it.
| 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 | | | |
ModernLoop Workable first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, ModernLoop on the left and Workable on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where ModernLoop and Workable stood in it.
ModernLoop first, Workable not the choice
5 of 12 modelsWorkable was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Gemini 3.5 FlashModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, candidate.fyi
Perplexity SonarModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime, Lever
DeepSeek V4 FlashGreenhouse, ModernLoop alternatives: Ashby, Calendly, Lever
Llama 4 MaverickModernLoop alternatives: Greenhouse, Lever
GLM 4.7 FlashXModernLoop alternatives: GoodTime, Lever, candidate.fyi
Neither was the first choice, one was named
5 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Cronofy, Greenhouse alternatives: Calendly, Koalendar, ModernLoop
Grok 4.1 FastGoodTime, Lever alternatives: Greenhouse, ModernLoop
Mistral SmallLever alternatives: Koalendar, ModernLoop
Kimi K2Lever alternatives: GoodTime, Greenhouse, ModernLoop
MiniMax M2.5Cal.com, Lever alternatives: GoodTime, Greenhouse, ModernLoop
Neither was named
2 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniGoodTime alternatives: Ashby, Calendly
Qwen 3.7 FlashGreenhouse alternatives: Calendly, GoodTime, Lever, LimeLight, Lunacal
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
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Workable leads by two points.
Workable2%#– of 11ModernLoop0%#11 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: ModernLoop leads at mid-market.
ModernLoop15%#2 of 11Workable4%#8 of 11Enterprise
Workable is not named for this buyer.
ModernLoop0%#5 of 9Workable—not namedWhat the models said about ModernLoop
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“Enterprise, quote-only, often thousands per month — avoid these on a limited budget” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“expensive administrative overkill for small-to-midsize companies (under 100 employees)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“ModernLoop can add friction and slow your process” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · soft negative
“ModernLoop is the strongest default choice because it is repeatedly positioned as a mid-market tool with strong automation” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · first choice
“The Top Pick: ModernLoop ... widely considered the strongest standalone scheduling tool for mid-market companies” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
“Add ModernLoop (or Calendly for lighter needs) on top — it's the value sweet spot for mid-market.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Workable
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.
“Avoid ATS-style recruiting platforms like Breezy HR, Workable, or GoodTime if budget is tight” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · hard negative
Also compared
Calendly vs ModernLoopCalendly vs WorkableModernLoop vs GreenhouseModernLoop vs KoalendarModernLoop vs GoodTimeModernLoop vs LeverModernLoop vs candidate.fyiGreenhouse vs WorkableKoalendar vs WorkableGoodTime vs WorkableLever vs Workablecandidate.fyi vs WorkableAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full interview scheduling standing
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.