§ The result
DevSkiller leads Ceipal on 6 of the 7 criteria.
DevSkiller (Assessment) edges Ceipal (ATS-integrated) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 39 to 35. DevSkiller leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Ceipal is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 DevSkiller leads is Bias Audit Transparency, Ceipal 20 to DevSkiller 22. Human Oversight Design is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ceipal 46, DevSkiller 55, 12% weight), but it accounts for only 27% of the weighted advantage DevSkiller holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
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
Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, DevSkiller under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only DevSkiller is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ceipal | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | PL |
| Founded | 2015 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · DevSkiller 55
1.1 weighted points to DevSkiller
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · DevSkiller 35
1.0 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · DevSkiller 52
0.9 weighted points to DevSkiller
8% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · DevSkiller 58
0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · DevSkiller 22
0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · DevSkiller 40
0.2 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 52 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 58 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 39 (F) | -4 | -4.0 |
§ 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 | Ceipal | 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% | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 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 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 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