HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Cronofy · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Cronofy

10Judge labels

1First choices

1Negative labels

6 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.1, 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. Cronofy was named 9 times in Interview scheduling, where Calendly led with 21%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market13 of 72

under the label threshold

Enterprise19 of 59

under the label threshold

In interview scheduling · 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 Cronofy 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	2%	13 of 72	11%	9	under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 21%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct1 label1

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative7 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 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.

“Cronofy is ideal for mid-to-large organizations who need seamless ATS integration and automated scheduling for complex interviews” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Interview scheduling · direct prompt · first choice

“Choose Cronofy if you're embedding scheduling into your own app or need calendar infrastructure” GPT-5.4 mini · Interview scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative

“Cronofy simplifies interview scheduling with automated self-scheduling links” Claude Haiku 4.5 · Interview scheduling · comparative prompt · alternative

“Building custom solution? → Cronofy API” Kimi K2 · Interview scheduling · 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.

“Cronofy’s lack of live help and limited scheduling automation can be frustrating” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Interview scheduling · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Cronofy, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Cronofy was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Calendly10 of 102Not in the top three

ModernLoop9 of 100Not in the top three

GoodTime8 of 104Not in the top three

Paradox6 of 100Not in the top three

HireVue5 of 100Not in the top three

Greenhouse4 of 100Not in the top three

VidCruiter4 of 100Not in the top three

Cal.com3 of 101Not in the top three

candidate.fyi3 of 101Not in the top three

YouCanBookMe3 of 100Not 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 Cronofy. 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 10 of the 10 answers that named Cronofy and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

candidate.fyi6

goodtime.io6

lunacal.ai6

selectsoftwarereviews.com6

cal.com5

hiretruffle.com5

joveo.com5

lever.co5

metaview.ai4

calendly.com3

Fifty-one of the fifty-one domain citations in answers naming Cronofy came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

goodtime.io/blog/talent-operations/best-interview-scheduling-software6

lunacal.ai/blogs/interview-scheduling-software-recruiter6

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/interview-scheduling-software6

cal.com/blog/best-interview-scheduling-software5

hiretruffle.com/blog/interview-scheduling-tools5

joveo.com/blog/top-interview-scheduling-tools5

lever.co/insights/best-interview-scheduling-software5

candidate.fyi/interview-scheduling-software4

Pages are listed as the models cited 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 Cronofy'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 Cronofy, 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 crono.one 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.