From the experiment

Do coding agents recommend ALTCHA?

ALTCHA was chosen in 5% of 280 judged bot protection sessions, ranking fourth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code.

Published October 14, 2026 Read as Markdown

ALTCHA was chosen in 5% of 280 judged bot protection sessions, ranking fourth. It was also raised as a candidate in 59 further sessions without being chosen.

This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in bot protection inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about ALTCHA. What an agent actually installed.

The numbers

CategoryBot protection
Sessions in the category280
Sessions where ALTCHA was chosen13
Install share5%
Rank in category4 of 7
Codebases it won in3
Raised as a candidate, not chosen59
Chosen when considered18%
Sitealtcha.org

By agent

With 13 wins spread across 5 agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established.

AgentSessionsChose ALTCHAShare
Claude Code6900%
Codex8400%
Cursor671218%
Grok Build CLI1517%
Muse Code4500%

By who was asking

ALTCHA performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 0% to 8%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 24 of the 31 categories we measured.

Who is askingSessionsChose ALTCHAShare
Vibe coder10998%
Junior developer11100%
Enterprise team6047%

What ALTCHA was up against

The full ranking in bot protection, from the same sessions:

#ProductRuns wonShare
1Cloudflare Turnstile16860%
2Built in-house (no product adopted)3111%
3Vercel BotID2810%
4django-axes155%
5ALTCHA (this page)135%
6Google reCAPTCHA135%
7Laravel RateLimiter21%
8django-simple-captcha10%

What this means

This is an integration problem, not a presence problem. Agents raised ALTCHA in 59 sessions and chose it in 13, so it reaches the shortlist and then loses. Something at the last step is costing the session, and in our data that is usually a quickstart that does not run when pasted, documentation describing an interface that changed, or a package name that does not match the product name.

That is the cheaper of the two problems to have. The reason is written down in each losing transcript.

Where these numbers come from

The 280 sessions in bot protection are part of a published set of 15,287, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.

Every bot protection run can be replayed on the board.

If you work on ALTCHA: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.

<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->

Common questions

Do coding agents recommend ALTCHA?

Yes. ALTCHA was chosen in 13 of the 280 judged sessions in bot protection, a 5% install share, ranking fourth in its category.

Does Claude Code recommend ALTCHA?

In 0 of the 69 sessions in bot protection run with Claude Code, which is 0%.

Do different coding agents treat ALTCHA differently?

Yes, and by a wide margin. Cursor chose it in 18% of its runs and Claude Code in 0%.

How was this measured?

Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 110 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.

How often is ALTCHA considered but not chosen?

It was raised as a candidate in 59 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 13. That is a 18% conversion from considered to chosen.

Where this comes from

Armature ran 15,287 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code inside 110 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.

Read next

All library pages