Do coding agents recommend pytest-benchmark?
pytest-benchmark was chosen in 6% of 359 judged performance testing sessions, ranking second.
pytest-benchmark was chosen in 6% of 359 judged performance testing sessions, ranking second. It was also raised as a candidate in 31 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 performance testing inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about pytest-benchmark. What an agent actually installed.
One thing to read first: every one of those wins came from a single codebase. That is a result about one repository rather than about performance testing in general, and the splits below cannot separate the two. Treat them as a description of that repository.
The numbers
| Category | Performance testing |
| Sessions in the category | 359 |
| Sessions where pytest-benchmark was chosen | 22 |
| Install share | 6% |
| Rank in category | 2 of 16 |
| Codebases it won in | 1 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 31 |
| Chosen when considered | 42% |
| Site | pytest-benchmark.readthedocs.io |
By agent
Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Muse Code agree closely on pytest-benchmark, choosing it at rates within 1 points of each other. Grok Build CLI ran fewer than 30 sessions here, too few to compare.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose pytest-benchmark | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 89 | 6 | 7% |
| Codex | 108 | 6 | 6% |
| Cursor | 90 | 6 | 7% |
| Grok Build CLI | 18 | 1 | 6% |
| Muse Code | 54 | 3 | 6% |
By who was asking
pytest-benchmark performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 0% to 9%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 24 of the 31 categories we measured.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose pytest-benchmark | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior developer | 20 | 0 | 0% |
| Senior engineer | 239 | 22 | 9% |
| Enterprise team | 100 | 0 | 0% |
What pytest-benchmark was up against
The full ranking in performance testing, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 202 | 56% |
| 2 | JMH | 30 | 8% |
| 3 | pytest-benchmark (this page) | 22 | 6% |
| 4 | Grafana k6 | 22 | 6% |
| 5 | hyperfine | 19 | 5% |
| 6 | PHPBench | 19 | 5% |
| 7 | Autocannon | 19 | 5% |
| 8 | BenchmarkDotNet | 8 | 2% |
What this means
pytest-benchmark was raised in 31 sessions and chosen in 22. That ratio is balanced enough that the ceiling is presence rather than integration: the product converts reasonably when it is on the table, and it is not on the table often enough.
Where these numbers come from
The 359 sessions in performance testing 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 performance testing run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on pytest-benchmark: 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 pytest-benchmark?
Yes. pytest-benchmark was chosen in 22 of the 359 judged sessions in performance testing, a 6% install share, ranking second in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend pytest-benchmark?
In 6 of the 89 sessions in performance testing run with Claude Code, which is 7%.
Do different coding agents treat pytest-benchmark differently?
Not much. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Muse Code chose it at similar rates, between 6% and 7% of their runs.
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 pytest-benchmark considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 31 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 22. That is a 42% 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.