§ The result
4 points separate Arctic Shores and Coderbyte.
Under rubric v1.0, Arctic Shores and Coderbyte finish 4 points apart, 46 to 42, as two Assessment entries. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Arctic Shores: Arctic Shores is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Coderbyte on Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Arctic Shores 35, Coderbyte 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 56% of the weighted advantage Arctic Shores holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Arctic Shores
Arctic Shores sells a task-based psychometric assessment platform ("Una") that scores candidates on behaviour captured during short interactive tasks - covering personality, workplace intelligence and learning agility - rather than self-report questionnaires or CV review.
Vendor profile
Coderbyte
Coderbyte is a technical hiring platform offering coding assessments with automated and AI grading of challenges and take-home projects, live coding interviews, and AI screening that grades resumes against job-description criteria and runs agentic phone screens.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and Coderbyte are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | Coderbyte |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Coderbyte 20
2.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
20% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Coderbyte 44
1.2 weighted points to Arctic Shores
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Coderbyte 40
1.2 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Coderbyte 60
0.5 weighted points to Coderbyte
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Coderbyte 58
0.5 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Arctic Shores 35 · Coderbyte 33
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Arctic Shores 57 · Coderbyte 56
0.1 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Coderbyte.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Coderbyte | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 44 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 56 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 42 (F) | +4 | +3.2 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Arctic Shores | Coderbyte | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Coderbyte has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Coderbyte sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Coderbyte last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next