HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › Lunacal · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Lunacal

3Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

3 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Lunacal was named 2 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-market22 of 72

under the label threshold

Enterprise22 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 Lunacal 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	0%	22 of 72	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 21%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Lunacal 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 Lunacal 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	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	1
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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 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.

“Lightweight alternative with strong calendar integration” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Interview scheduling · 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 Lunacal, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Lunacal was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GoodTime3 of 31Not in the top three

Calendly2 of 30Not in the top three

Greenhouse1 of 31Not in the top three

Acuity Scheduling1 of 30Not in the top three

Doodle1 of 30Not in the top three

Google Calendar1 of 30Not in the top three

Koalendar1 of 30Not in the top three

Lever1 of 30Not in the top three

LimeLight1 of 30Not in the top three

Microsoft Bookings1 of 30Not 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 Lunacal. 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 3 of the 3 answers that named Lunacal and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

hiretruffle.com3

lunacal.aiYour site3

learn.g2.com2

lever.co2

100hires.com1

arrangeai.io1

bestrecruitingtools.com1

cal.com1

candidate.fyi1

cxeverywhere.com1

Thirteen of the sixteen domain citations in answers naming Lunacal came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

hiretruffle.com/blog/interview-scheduling-tools3

lunacal.ai/blogs/interview-scheduling-software-recruiter3

learn.g2.com/best-interview-scheduling-software2

lever.co/insights/best-interview-scheduling-software2

100hires.com/lever-vs-greenhouse.html1

arrangeai.io/blog/cost-effective-interview-scheduling-software-recruiting-agencies-8bf3d1

bestrecruitingtools.com/blog/best-interview-scheduling-software-enterprise-20261

cal.com/blog/best-interview-scheduling-software1

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 Lunacal'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 Lunacal, 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 lunacal.ai 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.