§ The result
Codility leads Brainner on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Codility, filed under Assessment, finishes on 54 and Brainner, filed under Screening, on 46, 8 points apart. Codility takes all 7 criteria from Brainner without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Bias Audit Transparency, Brainner 42 to Codility 45. Even FRIA Support, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Brainner 30, Codility 42, 15% weight), is only 25% of the weighted advantage Codility builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Brainner
Brainner is an AI screening layer for applicant tracking systems that scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted criteria with per-criterion justifications, and flags suspected fake applicants using third-party identity and fraud data.
Vendor profile
Codility
Codility is a technical/coding assessment platform that screens and interviews software engineers with work-sample coding tests, live technical interviews, and integrity tooling including plagiarism and AI-use detection.
§ The record
Brainner is filed under Screening AI, Codility under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Codility is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Brainner | Codility |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2023 | 2009 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 25% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Brainner 30 · Codility 42
1.8 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · Codility 60
1.6 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brainner 50 · Codility 62
1.4 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · Codility 66
0.6 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brainner 53 · Codility 57
0.6 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brainner 45 · Codility 50
0.6 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brainner 42 · Codility 45
0.5 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brainner minus Codility.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | Codility | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 57 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 50 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 54 (F) | -8 | -7.2 |
§ 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 | Brainner | Codility | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Brainner has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Codility has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Brainner sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Codility 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