§ The result
Coderbyte leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Coderbyte sits 12 points above Moonhub under rubric v1.0 — 42 against 30 — with Coderbyte filed under Assessment and Moonhub under Sourcing. Of the 7 criteria Moonhub wins none, and the narrowest lead Coderbyte holds is on Bias Audit Transparency, Coderbyte 20 to Moonhub 18. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Coderbyte 58, Moonhub 38) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Coderbyte 44, Moonhub 30), 23% of the weighted advantage Coderbyte builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Coderbyte is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Coderbyte is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Coderbyte | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Coderbyte 44 · Moonhub 30
2.8 weighted points to Coderbyte
15% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Coderbyte 56 · Moonhub 40
2.4 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Coderbyte 40 · Moonhub 22
2.2 weighted points to Coderbyte
8% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Coderbyte 58 · Moonhub 38
1.6 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Coderbyte 60 · Moonhub 48
1.4 weighted points to Coderbyte
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Coderbyte 33 · Moonhub 25
1.2 weighted points to Coderbyte
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Coderbyte 20 · Moonhub 18
0.4 weighted points to Coderbyte
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Coderbyte minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Coderbyte | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 30 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 18 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 25 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 40 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 22 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 38 | +20 | +1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 30 (F) | +12 | +12.0 |
§ 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 | Coderbyte | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Coderbyte has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 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 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Coderbyte last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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