§ The result
BrightHire leads CodeSignal on 6 of the 7 criteria.
BrightHire scores 51 and CodeSignal 43 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. BrightHire leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so CodeSignal is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 BrightHire leads is Post-Market Monitoring, BrightHire 42 to CodeSignal 38. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (BrightHire 52, CodeSignal 38, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage BrightHire holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
BrightHire
BrightHire is an interview intelligence platform that records, transcribes and analyzes hiring interviews into competency-structured notes and ATS scorecards, and additionally runs AI-led screening interviews (BrightHire Screen) that score and rank candidates against customer-defined rubrics.
Vendor profile
CodeSignal
CodeSignal is a technical skills assessment and interview platform for developer hiring that adds AI features including an AI Interviewer, AI-assisted/agentic coding assessments, and AI-plus-human proctoring.
§ The record
BrightHire is filed under Screening AI, CodeSignal under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | BrightHire | CodeSignal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
BrightHire 52 · CodeSignal 38
2.8 weighted points to BrightHire
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
BrightHire 36 · CodeSignal 25
1.6 weighted points to BrightHire
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
BrightHire 60 · CodeSignal 50
1.5 weighted points to BrightHire
18% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
BrightHire 50 · CodeSignal 45
0.9 weighted points to BrightHire
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
BrightHire 60 · CodeSignal 55
0.6 weighted points to BrightHire
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
BrightHire 42 · CodeSignal 38
0.5 weighted points to BrightHire
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +7.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 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 +7.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is BrightHire minus CodeSignal.
| Category | Weight | BrightHire | CodeSignal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 36 | 25 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 51 (F) | 43 (F) | +8 | +7.9 |
§ 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 | BrightHire | CodeSignal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
BrightHire has 23 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; CodeSignal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 23 for BrightHire, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- BrightHire last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 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