HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › SkillCheck · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

SkillCheck

3Judge labels

0First choices

3Negative labels

3 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

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. SkillCheck was named 3 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 businessnot named

No model named it for this buyer.

Mid-market51 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 SkillCheck 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%	51 of 52	100%	2	under 10 labels · led by HackerRank at 28%
Candidate assessment	Talent acquisition	0%	94 of 101	100%	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 SkillCheck 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 SkillCheck across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative3 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.

No positive label carried a quote.

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.

“SkillCheck frequently receives criticism for its candidate experience, which is reportedly so poor that it negatively impacts your ability to hire top talent.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · hard negative

“Strong technical content, but a poor candidate experience... clunky interface that leads to frustration and drop-off.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Candidate assessment · negative prompt · hard negative

“High candidate drop-off (up to 64% in reviews), terrible UX leading to unfinished assessments” Grok 4.1 Fast · Technical hiring assessm · negative prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as SkillCheck, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and SkillCheck was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

TestGorilla2 of 30Not in the top three

CodeSignal1 of 31Not in the top three

CoderPad1 of 31Not in the top three

British Council1 of 30Not in the top three

Coderbyte1 of 30Not in the top three

Codility1 of 30Not in the top three

Glider.ai1 of 30Not in the top three

HackerRank1 of 30Not in the top three

Pearson Vue1 of 30Not in the top three

ProctorU1 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 SkillCheck. 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 SkillCheck and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

g2.com3

reddit.com3

thedailyhire.com3

trustpilot.com3

articsledge.com1

bbc.com1

blog.imocha.io1

ca.trustpilot.com1

capterra.com1

checkthat.ai1

Eighteen of the eighteen domain citations in answers naming SkillCheck came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

thedailyhire.com/tools/skillcheck-assessment-platform-review3

g2.com/discussions/what-s-the-candidate-experience-and-adverse-impact-of-technical-screeni2

reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/o8ig5t/anyone_take_an_assessment_with_test_gorilla2

articsledge.com/post/performance-review-software1

bbc.com/news/articles/crk3xd8j3k5o1

blog.imocha.io/coderbyte-vs-hackerrank1

blog.imocha.io/codility-vs-hackerrank1

ca.trustpilot.com/review/proctoru.com1

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 SkillCheck'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 SkillCheck, 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 skill.re 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.