§ The result
Cangrade leads DevSkiller by 6 points.
Cangrade scores 45 and DevSkiller 39 under rubric v1.0 — a 6-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Cangrade leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while DevSkiller leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 52, DevSkiller 35 — and at a 20% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Cangrade holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cangrade
Cangrade is a predictive pre-hire assessment and screening platform that scores candidates against customer-specific success models built from roughly 50 psychometric traits, with add-on modules for resume screening, structured and video interviews, interview scheduling, and reference checking.
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
Cangrade and DevSkiller are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cangrade | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | PL |
| Founded | 2014 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · DevSkiller 35
3.4 weighted points to Cangrade
18% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · DevSkiller 22
2.3 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · DevSkiller 40
1.0 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · DevSkiller 25
0.8 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · DevSkiller 58
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · DevSkiller 52
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · DevSkiller 55
0.1 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 35 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 39 (F) | +6 | +6.3 |
§ 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 | Cangrade | DevSkiller | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 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 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 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 Cangrade and DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 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