How we make this list: we compare pricing pages, product documentation and public user reviews. Ratings come from G2, Capterra or Trustpilot, with the date we checked them.
Key takeaways
- HackerRank suits high-volume screening, with a deep ready-made question bank and live CodePair interviews.
- CodeSignal fits mid-to-senior hiring, with realistic full-stack coding scenarios from $79 per month billed annually.
- TestGorilla is the lowest published price alternative, at $77 per month for a 25-employee company.
- CoderPad suits live interviews, with Starter at $80 per month billed annually covering 60 interviews a year.
- CodeSubmit suits teams that prefer real-world take-home projects over algorithm puzzles, from $199 per month.
Quick comparison
| Tool | Best for | Starting price | Free plan |
|---|
 HackerRank | High-volume screening | See website | Free trial |
 CodeSignal | Realistic senior assessments | $79 per month | Free trial |
 TestGorilla | Lowest published price | $77 per month | Free trial |
 CoderPad | Live technical interviews | $80 per month | Free trial |
 HackerEarth | Role-based developer tests | $99 per month | Free trial |
 Coderbyte | Unlimited technical assessments | $199 per month | Free trial |
 CodeSubmit | Real-world take-home projects | $199 per month | Free trial |
 Karat | Managed expert interviews | See website | Free trial |
Is your product missing or out of date?
We review this list regularly. Vendors can request a listing, send updated pricing or ask about featured placement.
The best Codility alternatives
Starting priceSee website
Free planFree trial
HackerRank suits teams that screen high volumes of candidates and want a deep, ready-made question bank. Standardized tests with skill-level filtering make it easy to screen at scale without designing every question from scratch, and CodePair covers live interviews on the same platform. That breadth is why HackerRank is the most common Codility replacement for enterprise hiring.
Published prices vary across guides, from $79 per month to $198 per month for Starter and $450 per month for Pro, so we list "See website" and advise confirming the current plan. HackerRank packages use attempt limits, and overage attempts cost extra, which adds up at high volume. For a team that needs fast, scalable screening with a wide question bank, HackerRank is the default choice.
What we like- Large ready-made question bank
- Role-based assessments
- CodePair live interviews
Watch out for- Published prices vary across guides
- Per-attempt costs add up at volume
Starting price$79 per month
Free planFree trial
CodeSignal fits teams hiring mid-to-senior engineers who want realistic, full-stack style coding scenarios rather than puzzle-style problems. Its built-in IDE supports a wide range of languages and lets candidates work on scenarios closer to actual job tasks, which gives a clearer read on practical coding ability for senior roles. Build lists at $79 per month billed annually with 60 annual credits, consumed when candidates start assessments or interviews rather than when invitations are sent.
Larger plans are quote-based, so direct cost comparison needs a quote in hand. Users praise the intuitive interface and simulation-style assessments, though occasional technical glitches during assessments are reported. For senior hiring where realism matters more than question-bank size, CodeSignal is the best pick.
What we like- Realistic full-stack scenarios
- Intuitive interface
- Good value ratings
Watch out for- Quote-based for larger plans
- Occasional technical glitches reported
Starting price$77 per month
Free planFree trial
TestGorilla is the lowest published price alternative to Codility, at $77 per month for a 25-employee company, and it offers the widest assessment variety beyond coding, covering cognitive ability, personality and role-specific skills. That breadth suits small businesses that hire across many roles, not just developers, since one platform covers technical and non-technical assessments alike.
Coding depth trails HackerRank and CodeSignal, so teams hiring senior engineers may need a dedicated coding tool alongside it. For a small business that wants one affordable assessment platform for every role, TestGorilla's price and variety are unmatched.
What we like- Lowest published price
- Wide assessment variety
- Small-business friendly
Watch out for- Less coding depth than HackerRank
- Enterprise features need higher tiers
Starting price$80 per month
Free planFree trial
CoderPad suits live technical interviews, with a collaborative IDE where interviewers and candidates code together in real time. Starter lists at $80 per month billed annually with 60 interviews a year, or $120 per month with five interviews a month, and playback lets hiring teams replay an interview to review how a candidate approached the problem. That replay feature is valuable for panel debriefs.
CoderPad's assessment library is smaller than HackerRank's, and the platform is interview-focused rather than screening-focused, so high-volume screening needs another tool. For a team whose main need is high-quality live interviews, CoderPad is the best experience available.
What we like- Best live interview experience
- Collaborative IDE
- Playback and replay
Watch out for- Assessment library smaller than HackerRank
- Interview-focused rather than screening-focused
Starting price$99 per month
Free planFree trial
HackerEarth suits recruiting teams hiring developers through coding assessments, with role-based tests and live technical interviews on one platform. Growth plans run near $99 per month, and the platform's hackathon and challenge community adds a sourcing channel that other assessment tools lack. That community angle helps teams that hire from coding competitions.
Integrations are limited on Starter plans, and the ecosystem is smaller than HackerRank's. For a team that wants role-based developer tests plus a community sourcing channel, HackerEarth is a strong mid-priced option.
What we like- Role-based developer assessments
- Live technical interviews
- Hackathon sourcing
Watch out for- Limited integrations on Starter
- Smaller ecosystem than HackerRank
Starting price$199 per month
Free planFree trial
Coderbyte suits tech recruiters seeking unlimited technical assessments, with plans from $199 per month covering unlimited candidates, an integrated coding IDE and automated grading. Unlimited candidates matter for teams with unpredictable hiring spikes, since per-attempt pricing on other platforms punishes volume. Automated grading speeds up screening without manual review of every submission, and the IDE supports many languages so candidates work in the stack they will actually use on the job.
The $199 entry price is expensive for smaller or low-volume teams, and brand recognition trails HackerRank. For a team with steady high-volume technical hiring that wants predictable costs, Coderbyte's unlimited model is the best value.
What we like- Unlimited candidates
- Integrated coding IDE
- Automated grading
Watch out for- Expensive for smaller or low-volume teams
- Less brand recognition than HackerRank
Starting price$199 per month
Free planFree trial
CodeSubmit takes a different approach from puzzle-based platforms: candidates clone a real project, work in their own IDE and submit a pull request. Hiring teams see how candidates structure code across files, write commit messages and handle edge cases when nobody is watching the clock, which predicts on-the-job performance better than timed algorithm tests. Plans start at $199 per month for Startup, with Scaleup at $299 per month or $239 billed annually, covering 30 candidate credits a month and unlimited team members.
Take-home projects take longer than timed tests, both for candidates and reviewers, and the ready-made library of 800 plus tasks is smaller than HackerRank's 7,500 plus. For a team that values real-world signal over puzzle speed, CodeSubmit's Git-based workflow is the best assessment method available.
What we like- Real-world take-home challenges
- Git-based workflow
- Candidates use their own IDE
Watch out for- Take-homes take longer than timed tests
- Smaller question bank than HackerRank
Starting priceSee website
Free planFree trial
Karat suits teams that want managed expert interviews rather than running interviews themselves. Professional interviewers from Karat's network conduct structured technical interviews, score candidates consistently and return detailed feedback, which frees internal engineers from interview load. That consistency is valuable for companies scaling hiring fast without overloading their engineering team.
Pricing is quote-only and total cost runs highest for high-volume hiring, since each interview carries a managed service fee. For a company that needs consistent, expert-led interviews without taxing its engineers, Karat's managed model is the premium option.
What we like- Expert interviewers run interviews
- Consistent scoring
- Reduces engineering time
Watch out for- Quote-only pricing
- Highest total cost for high-volume hiring
How we chose
We compared assessment platforms on question quality, realism, interview tools, anti-cheating, pricing transparency and fit for small, mid-size and enterprise teams. We used vendor pricing pages and recent comparison guides for rates, and we favored tools with published prices where available. We did not claim hands-on testing. Instead we weighed what each tool measures, how candidates experience it, and what it costs per month or per attempt, so hiring teams can match a tool to their hiring volume and seniority mix. Where published prices conflicted, as with HackerRank, we used "See website" rather than picking one figure.
Puzzle tests versus real-world work
How you screen shapes who says yes. Algorithm puzzles reward memorization and speed under pressure, and senior candidates often refuse to participate in them. Real-world take-homes and full-stack scenarios reward engineering judgment: code structure, edge-case handling and communication. The best hiring processes combine both: a short realistic screening task to filter, followed by a live interview to probe depth. Keep the screening task close to the real job: debugging an existing codebase, extending a feature or reviewing a pull request tells you more than a whiteboard puzzle. Give candidates the tools they will use at work, including their own IDE and documentation access, since a realistic environment produces a realistic signal and a better candidate experience. Candidates remember the process long after they forget the questions. A respectful process always wins hires even when you say no today.
Also consider fairness and validity. Ask vendors for validation evidence tied to the roles you hire for, review accessibility and reasonable accommodations, and track outcomes over time. Employers remain responsible for appropriate use even when vendors provide validation documentation, so confirm obligations with counsel before rolling out a new assessment at scale. Pilot any new assessment with a small candidate group first, and compare its pass rates against your existing process to catch adverse impact early, before it affects a full hiring round.
Frequently asked questions
What is the cheapest Codility alternative?
TestGorilla is cheapest at $77 per month for a 25-employee company. CodeSignal Build follows at $79 per month billed annually, and CoderPad Starter at $80 per month billed annually.
Which tool is best for senior engineers?
CodeSignal is best for senior engineers, with realistic full-stack scenarios that mirror actual job tasks. CodeSubmit's real-world take-home projects are also strong for senior roles, since they reveal code structure and judgment.
Do these tools charge per candidate or per month?
Both models exist. CodeSignal and CoderPad use credits or attempt limits, HackerRank packages use attempt limits with overage fees, and Coderbyte offers unlimited candidates for a flat monthly price. Verify usage definitions before comparing total costs.
How do I avoid bias in technical assessments?
Ask vendors for validation evidence, review accessibility and accommodations, offer less-discriminatory alternatives where available, and track outcomes over time. Structured scoring rubrics and consistent interview formats reduce bias more than any single tool choice.
How long should a technical assessment take?
Keep screening assessments under 60 minutes and take-home projects under four hours of candidate effort. Longer assessments drop completion rates sharply, especially for senior candidates with competing offers. State the expected time upfront, pay or compensate for longer take-homes where your policy allows, and respect the candidate's time as part of your employer brand.
Should I use take-home projects or timed tests?
Use timed tests for high-volume screening and take-home projects for finalists. Take-homes reveal real-world judgment but take longer, so reserve them for candidates who pass an initial screen.
Sources we checked (8)
- https://www.hackerrank.com
- https://codesignal.com
- https://www.testgorilla.com
- https://coderpad.io
- https://www.hackerearth.com
- https://coderbyte.com
- https://codesubmit.io
- https://karat.com
Is your product missing or out of date?
We review this list regularly. Vendors can request a listing, send updated pricing or ask about featured placement.
Shihab Mia · Founder, Rankite
Shihab has 5+ years in B2B and SaaS SEO. He writes Rankite's software buying guides from pricing pages, documentation and public user reviews. More about Shihab.