Interview Coder vs LockedIn AI (2026)

Both tools promise the same thing: an AI that feeds you answers during a live interview without the interviewer seeing it. The difference is what they run on and what they can prove. LockedIn AI's main product is a Chrome browser extension, and the browser layer is visible during a screen share. Interview Coder is a native desktop app built so the overlay never lives inside the browser tab the interview is watching. And on proof, the gap is wider: LockedIn shows anonymous testimonials and vanity stats; Interview Coder shows face-shown video recordings of real interviews plus offer-letter screenshots. This is the full sourced comparison.

Disclosure first: we build Interview Coder, a desktop AI assistant for live coding interviews. LockedIn AI competes with us. Read with that bias in mind. Every claim about LockedIn below links to a source we pulled this week — the live site, their support docs, the Chrome Web Store, Trustpilot, and independent reviews. Check our work.

This is the part that decides everything else.

LockedIn AI is primarily a Chrome browser extension. Its store listing (kfhkeghcignojkdcnemgcggojlmneema) shows about 20,000 users and 4.6 stars from 70 ratings (Chrome Web Store). A browser extension renders inside the browser. When you share your screen — and most remote coding rounds make you share your full screen — the extension is part of what's captured. LockedIn does sell a separate desktop app with a "True Stealth Mode," but the stealth claim applies only to that desktop app, not to the default browser product most people install.

Interview Coder is a native desktop application. The overlay is drawn by the operating system, outside the browser and outside the meeting window, so it isn't part of the captured surface during a screen share. That's the architectural reason a native app can stay hidden where a browser extension can't. If you want the deeper mechanics, our detectability breakdown and the undetectable AI interview tools explainer cover how screen-share capture actually works.

Here's the test we run on our own builds, and you can run it yourself before any real interview: open a Google Meet call, start "Present your entire screen," and pin the meeting preview where you can see exactly what the other side sees. Anything rendered inside the browser tab — including a Chrome extension's panel — shows up in that preview. A native overlay drawn by the OS does not. It's a 60-second check, and it's the single most useful thing you can do to sanity-check any "stealth" claim instead of trusting the marketing copy.

LockedIn's "True Stealth Mode" is described as running "locally at system level with zero browser footprint, no taskbar icons, window titles, or detectable processes," and "invisible to screen sharing and proctoring software" across Zoom, Google Meet, Teams, HireVue, and HackerRank (LockedIn support docs). The homepage also advertises a "116ms Avg Speed" response time (lockedinai.com).

Two caveats. First, that stealth claim is for the desktop app, not the Chrome extension that 20,000 people are running. The extension layer is visible during screen share. Second, the desktop window itself has been reported as detectable — the transparent window has been spotted, and a top Trustpilot complaint reads "when sharing the screen the opposite person able to see the screen," with the reviewer calling it "totally waste of my money" (Interview Sidekick). So the "entirely undetectable" framing does not match the default product or, in some reports, the desktop one either.

There's also a latency problem hiding behind the marketing number. Despite the "116ms" claim, Trustpilot users "consistently report 4-5 second response delays," producing a "latency stare" that recruiters notice (Interview Sidekick). A pause that long while you read off-screen is its own detection risk.

This is the core of the comparison, so be precise about it.

LockedIn AI's homepage shows only generic, anonymous testimonials — "Real results from real people who landed their dream roles" — with user avatars but no named individuals, no company names, no offer letters, and no video recordings of real interviews. The site leans on vanity stats: "1M+ Users" and "4.8 from 2,739 reviews" on the homepage (lockedinai.com), and "Trusted by 58,000+ professionals" on the pricing page (lockedinai.com/pricing). Those are usage and marketing numbers, not documented hiring outcomes.

Independent reviewers reach the same conclusion. Final Round AI's review found "no documented proof of actual interview outcomes or hiring success" (Final Round AI). Interview Sidekick's review found "No offer letters, videos, or specific testimonials documenting real interview wins" (Interview Sidekick).

Interview Coder publishes the opposite. It is the only AI interview tool with face-shown video recordings of real interviews at companies including Amazon, Oracle, Roblox, Snowflake, Citadel, IBM, and Capital One, alongside verified testimonials with screenshots of offer letters from Meta, Google, Apple, TikTok, and more. You can watch the faces and read the letters on the proof page. The distinction is simple: one side asserts results, the other side shows them with a face attached.

LockedIn runs a credit-and-subscription model. Verified figures, corroborated across their pricing page and support docs:

Two things matter here. The cheaper tiers are credit-metered, so a single one-hour interview burns a meaningful chunk of credits (LockedIn support). And stealth mode plus the desktop app only come with the credit plans or the $119.99/mo Unlimited Pro tier — the $54.99/mo Unlimited General plan has no desktop app at all, which means no stealth.

The model lineup is Azure GPT, Deepseek, Gemini, and O3 (LockedIn blog) — notably not Claude. Interview Coder's coding answers run on Claude Sonnet 4.6, Anthropic's latest Sonnet model. Interview Coder's pricing is flat and public: Free $0, Monthly Pro $299, Lifetime Pro $799 one-time — no credits to meter, no tier where the stealth feature is removed.

Beyond stealth and latency, independent reviews surface a consistent pattern:

To be fair to LockedIn: it covers more interview types than coding rounds — behavioral, system design, general live assist — and its free tier lets you try it at no cost. If you want a broad live-assist tool and you're comfortable with a browser extension, it's a real option. The case for Interview Coder is narrower and deeper: it does live coding rounds, on a native app the screen share doesn't capture, with proof you can watch.

Get Interview Coder. A native desktop app built only for live coding interviews. Answers run on Claude Sonnet 4.6 — Anthropic's latest Sonnet — and it's the only tool in the category that shows face-shown interview recordings and real offer letters. Free plan $0, Monthly Pro $299, or Lifetime Pro $799 one-time. Start free.

The honest read: LockedIn AI is a browser-first live-assist tool that markets a desktop "True Stealth Mode" the default product doesn't deliver, priced on credits, with no documented interview outcomes. Interview Coder is a native desktop app for coding rounds specifically, priced flat, on Claude Sonnet 4.6, and it shows faces and offer letters instead of claiming wins. If your interviews are coding rounds and you care whether the proof is real, that's the deciding line. Full disclosure: this guide is published by Interview Coder, its own product. For the full feature-by-feature breakdown, see the LockedIn AI alternative page, and if you're weighing the rest of the field, the UltraCode comparison and ShadeCoder comparison cover the other two native-vs-claims contenders.