HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Goodfit · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

Goodfit

5Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

2Categories

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.1, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

4 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Goodfit was named 4 times in Technical hiring assessm and 1 other category, where HackerRank led with 28%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business41 of 61

under the label threshold

Mid-market19 of 52

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

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 Goodfit 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
Technical hiring assessments	Talent acquisition	0%	19 of 52	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by HackerRank at 28%
Candidate assessment	Talent acquisition	0%	68 of 101	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by TestGorilla at 68%

Movement

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

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

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

Direct2 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative5 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“Goodfit is the stronger fit for many mid-market teams... want consolidation over deep specialization” Perplexity Sonar · Technical hiring assessm · direct prompt · alternative

“Goodfit - a practical choice for mid-market engineering teams hiring across functions in India.” Llama 4 Maverick · Technical hiring assessm · direct 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Goodfit, over the 5 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Goodfit was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

CodeSignal5 of 51Not in the top three

CoderPad5 of 51Not in the top three

HackerRank5 of 51Not in the top three

Codility3 of 50Not in the top three

TestGorilla2 of 52Not in the top three

Coderbyte2 of 50Not in the top three

Vervoe1 of 51Not in the top three

AbilityScreen1 of 50Not in the top three

Aptora1 of 50Not in the top three

Byteboard1 of 50Not 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 Goodfit. 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 4 of the 5 answers that named Goodfit and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

goodfit.soYour site4

hackerrank.com4

codesignal.com3

testlify.com3

adaface.com2

coderpad.io2

codesubmit.io2

codility.com2

selectsoftwarereviews.com2

testgorilla.com2

Twenty-two of the twenty-six domain citations in answers naming Goodfit came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

codesignal.com/blog/5-coding-assessment-platforms-for-your-technical-hiring3

goodfit.so/guides/best-coding-assessment-platforms3

adaface.com/coding-assessment-tools2

coderpad.io/2

codesubmit.io/blog/coding-assessment-tools2

codesubmit.io/blog/coding-assessment-tools-20242

codility.com/how-to-choose-technical-assessment-platform2

hackerrank.com/writing/best-coding-assessment-tools2

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 Goodfit'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 Goodfit, 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 goodfit.so 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.