§ The result
Ashby leads DevSkiller on all 7 criteria.
Ashby finishes 17 points clear of DevSkiller under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 39 — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria, DevSkiller none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Ashby 42 to DevSkiller 40. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ashby 62, DevSkiller 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
Vendor profile
DevSkiller
DevSkiller (now branded SkillPanel) provides technical skills assessment and coding tests that automatically score developer candidates on real-world work-sample tasks using hidden verification unit tests and static code analysis.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, DevSkiller under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only DevSkiller is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | PL |
| Founded | 2018 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · DevSkiller 22
7.2 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · DevSkiller 35
5.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · DevSkiller 25
2.5 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · DevSkiller 52
0.9 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · DevSkiller 55
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · DevSkiller 58
0.4 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · DevSkiller 40
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +17.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +17 beside that +17.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 35 | +28 | +5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 22 | +40 | +7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 39 (F) | +17 | +17.7 |
§ 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 | Ashby | DevSkiller | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 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