§ The result
Pinpoint leads Coderbyte on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Pinpoint (ATS-integrated) opens a 15-point lead on Coderbyte (Assessment), 57 to 42. Of the 7 criteria Coderbyte wins none, and the narrowest lead Pinpoint holds is on Human Oversight Design, Coderbyte 60 to Pinpoint 64. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Coderbyte 44, Pinpoint 72, 20% weight), is only 38% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint 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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
Coderbyte is filed under Assessment AI, Pinpoint under ATS-integrated 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 | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | JE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Coderbyte 44 · Pinpoint 72
5.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Coderbyte 20 · Pinpoint 42
4.0 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Coderbyte 56 · Pinpoint 68
1.8 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Coderbyte 40 · Pinpoint 52
1.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Coderbyte 33 · Pinpoint 38
0.8 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Coderbyte 58 · Pinpoint 66
0.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Coderbyte 60 · Pinpoint 64
0.5 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -14.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Coderbyte minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | Coderbyte | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 72 | -28 | -5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 42 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 38 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 68 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 57 (F) | -15 | -14.7 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 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 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Coderbyte last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint 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