Every category where a model named Cal.com 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
Interview scheduling	Talent acquisition	4%	8 of 72	0%	9	under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 21%
Workforce scheduling	Core HR and payroll	0%	15 of 94	0%	12	accepted challenger

Movement

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

By model

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

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

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

Direct10 labels1

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative22 labels2not counted in share

Budget-constrained3 labels1

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative8 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative45 labels in all, every segment counted; 2 of the 5 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.

“Cal.com has one of the most generous free tiers on the market. It allows for unlimited event types and booking pages under its free plan.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Interview scheduling · budget prompt · first choice

“Best for: Overall flexibility, customization, and transparent pricing” Mistral Small · Interview scheduling · comparative prompt · first choice

“I'd suggest starting with Lever or Cal.com” MiniMax M2.5 · Interview scheduling · direct prompt · first choice

“Cal.com (Best Overall)” MiniMax M2.5 · Interview scheduling · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Cal.com, over the 45 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cal.com was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Calendly39 of 4512Not in the top three

GoodTime19 of 4512Not in the top three

Acuity Scheduling17 of 450Not in the top three

ModernLoop14 of 450Not in the top three

Paradox12 of 450Not in the top three

Doodle11 of 450Not in the top three

Lever11 of 450Not in the top three

Greenhouse10 of 450Not in the top three

candidate.fyi8 of 451Not in the top three

Setmore8 of 450Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 Cal.com. 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 36 of the 45 answers that named Cal.com and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

cal.com31

lever.co15

youcanbook.me13

candidate.fyi12

learn.g2.com12

hiretruffle.com11

selectsoftwarereviews.com11

calendly.com9

goodtime.io9

lunacal.ai9

132 of the 132 domain citations in answers naming Cal.com came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

cal.com/blog/best-interview-scheduling-software18

lever.co/insights/best-interview-scheduling-software15

hiretruffle.com/blog/interview-scheduling-tools11

candidate.fyi/interview-scheduling-software10

goodtime.io/blog/talent-operations/best-interview-scheduling-software9

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/interview-scheduling-software9

learn.g2.com/best-interview-scheduling-software7

youcanbook.me/blog/best-scheduling-apps6

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Cal.com

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

Cal.com (formerly Calendso) 2Cal.com self-hosted 1

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 Cal.com'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 Cal.com, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

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 calcomply.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.