Do coding agents recommend YouTrust?
YouTrust was chosen in 8% of 106 judged e-signature sessions, ranking fourth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
YouTrust was chosen in 8% of 106 judged e-signature sessions, ranking fourth. It was also raised as a candidate in 2 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in e-signature inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about YouTrust. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | E-signature |
| Sessions in the category | 106 |
| Sessions where YouTrust was chosen | 9 |
| Install share | 8% |
| Rank in category | 4 of 9 |
| Codebases it won in | 3 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 2 |
| Chosen when considered | 82% |
| Site | youtrust.com |
By agent
With 9 wins spread across three 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.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose YouTrust | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 35 | 2 | 6% |
| Codex | 35 | 0 | 0% |
| Cursor | 36 | 7 | 19% |
By who was asking
YouTrust performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 4% to 17%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 24 of the 29 categories we measured.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose YouTrust | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior developer | 58 | 4 | 7% |
| Senior engineer | 24 | 1 | 4% |
| Enterprise team | 24 | 4 | 17% |
What YouTrust was up against
The full ranking in e-signature, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dropbox Sign | 32 | 30% |
| 2 | DocuSign | 31 | 29% |
| 3 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 11 | 10% |
| 4 | Microsoft 365 eSignature | 9 | 8% |
| 5 | YouTrust (this page) | 9 | 8% |
| 6 | Signable | 5 | 5% |
| 7 | Adobe Acrobat Sign | 3 | 3% |
| 8 | Documenso | 3 | 3% |
What this means
Agents almost never raise YouTrust without choosing it: 2 sessions raised against 9 chosen. When it gets considered, it usually wins. The constraint is how rarely it gets considered at all, which is a presence problem: templates, framework integrations and pages that answer the configuration and production questions agents actually search for.
Where these numbers come from
The 106 sessions in e-signature are part of a published set of 7,958, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every e-signature run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on YouTrust: 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 YouTrust?
Yes. YouTrust was chosen in 9 of the 106 judged sessions in e-signature, a 8% install share, ranking fourth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend YouTrust?
In 2 of the 35 sessions in e-signature run with Claude Code, which is 6%.
Do different coding agents treat YouTrust differently?
Yes, and by a wide margin. Cursor chose it in 19% of its runs and Codex in 0%.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 91 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 YouTrust considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 2 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 9. That is a 82% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 7,958 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor inside 91 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.