§ The result
3 points separate Cegid and Coderbyte.
Cegid (ATS-integrated) edges Coderbyte (Assessment) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 45 to 42. Cegid and Coderbyte each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Cegid holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cegid 30, Coderbyte 20) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 54% of the weighted advantage Cegid holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cegid
Cegid's HR suite offers two recruiting lines: Cegid HR Talent Acquisition (ex-DigitalRecruiters), an ATS/CRM with CV parsing, scorecards, automated scoring and an AI conversational agent that pre-qualifies candidates on career sites and WhatsApp, and Cegid Talentsoft (now sold as Cegid HR Suite) recruiting, whose 'Recruiting Match' matches positions to candidates algorithmically.
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
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Coderbyte 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 Coderbyte is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cegid | Coderbyte |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Coderbyte 20
1.8 weighted points to Cegid
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Coderbyte 44
1.2 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Coderbyte 60
0.6 weighted points to Coderbyte
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Coderbyte 58
0.3 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Coderbyte 33
0.1 weighted points to Coderbyte
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Coderbyte 56
0.1 weighted points to Coderbyte
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Coderbyte.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Coderbyte | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 44 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 42 (F) | +3 | +2.4 |
§ 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 | Cegid | Coderbyte | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 6 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 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 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