HR AI Index

Index › Vendors › TidyCal · September 2026 Edition

2 categories · Named, not ranked

TidyCal

2Judge labels

0First choices

0Negative labels

2 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

2 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. TidyCal was named 2 times in Interview scheduling and 1 other category, 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-market52 of 72

under the label threshold

Enterprisenot named

No model named it for this buyer.

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 TidyCal 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%	52 of 72	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Calendly at 21%
Workforce scheduling	Core HR and payroll	0%	52 of 94	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Deputy at 26%

Movement

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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative2 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.

“Best for: Solopreneurs and budget-conscious freelancers.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Workforce 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as TidyCal, over the 2 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and TidyCal was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Acuity Scheduling2 of 20Not in the top three

Cal.com2 of 20Not in the top three

Calendly2 of 20Not in the top three

Doodle2 of 20Not in the top three

Connecteam1 of 21Not in the top three

Deputy1 of 21Not in the top three

Ashby1 of 20Not in the top three

Chili Piper1 of 20Not in the top three

Clockwise1 of 20Not in the top three

GoodTime1 of 20Not 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 TidyCal. 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 1 of the 2 answers that named TidyCal and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

boilr.ai1

cal.com1

candidate.fyi1

credigeo.com1

cxeverywhere.com1

gitnux.org1

hiretruffle.com1

learn.g2.com1

lunacal.ai1

makeautomation.co1

Ten of the ten domain citations in answers naming TidyCal came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

boilr.ai/blog/best-ai-interview-scheduling-tools-recruitment-agencies-20261

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

candidate.fyi/interview-scheduling-software1

credigeo.com/evidence/index/interview-scheduling-measurement.json1

cxeverywhere.com/tools/interview-scheduling-software1

gitnux.org/best/interview-scheduling-software1

hiretruffle.com/blog/interview-scheduling-tools1

learn.g2.com/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 TidyCal'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 TidyCal, 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 tidycal.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.