HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Karat · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Karat

18Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

10 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

8 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Karat was named 8 times in Technical hiring assessm, 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 business59 of 61

under the label threshold

Mid-market13 of 52

under the label threshold

Enterprise11 of 38

under the label threshold

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 Karat 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%	13 of 52	12%	8	under 10 labels · led by HackerRank at 28%

Movement

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

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

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

Paraphrase5 labelsNone

Comparative10 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative1 labelNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative18 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.

“Ideal for teams using algorithmic LeetCode-style coding interviews.” Mistral Small · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“Live human-proctored interviews for experienced engineers: Karat.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“For algorithmic coding interviews: Karat or HackerRank” MiniMax M2.5 · Technical hiring assessm · comparative prompt · alternative

“For experienced/senior hires: Karat or Woven” Kimi K2 · Technical hiring assessm · 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.

“Cautious: Completely Outsourcing the Human Element (Karat)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Karat, over the 18 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Karat was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

HackerRank18 of 186Not in the top three

CodeSignal16 of 183Not in the top three

Codility15 of 182Not in the top three

CoderPad12 of 182Not in the top three

TestGorilla9 of 182Not in the top three

Woven7 of 181Not in the top three

DevSkiller4 of 180Not in the top three

Adaface2 of 180Not in the top three

HackerEarth2 of 180Not in the top three

Mercer | Mettl2 of 180Not 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 Karat. 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 13 of the 18 answers that named Karat and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hackerrank.com11

codility.com9

woventeams.com8

codesignal.com7

coderpad.io6

codesubmit.io6

devskiller.com6

gitnux.org6

g2.com5

testgorilla.com5

Sixty-nine of the sixty-nine domain citations in answers naming Karat came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

codility.com/how-to-choose-technical-assessment-platform8

woventeams.com/post/the-most-effective-technical-assessment-for-job-interviews8

hackerrank.com/writing/best-coding-assessment-tools7

codesubmit.io/blog/coding-assessment-tools-20246

devskiller.com/it/blog/technical-assessment-platforms6

gitnux.org/best/technical-assessment-software6

coderpad.io/blog/announcements/best-technical-assessment-software-for-hr-teams-in-20264

coderpad.io/enterprise4

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 Karat'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 Karat, 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 karat.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.