§ The result
TalentLens takes the total, Coderbyte takes more of the criteria.
TalentLens holds a 4-point edge over Coderbyte under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Coderbyte leads more of the criteria than TalentLens — 4 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which TalentLens leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to TalentLens. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Coderbyte 20, TalentLens 45) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 74% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds across the 2 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
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
§ The record
Coderbyte and TalentLens are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Coderbyte | TalentLens |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2012 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Coderbyte 20 · TalentLens 45
4.5 weighted points to TalentLens
20% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Coderbyte 44 · TalentLens 52
1.6 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Coderbyte 40 · TalentLens 32
1.0 weighted points to Coderbyte
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Coderbyte 56 · TalentLens 50
0.9 weighted points to Coderbyte
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Coderbyte 33 · TalentLens 30
0.4 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Coderbyte 60 · TalentLens 57
0.4 weighted points to Coderbyte
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.8 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 -3.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Coderbyte minus TalentLens.
| Category | Weight | Coderbyte | TalentLens | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 52 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 45 | -25 | -4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 30 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 57 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 32 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 46 (F) | -4 | -3.4 |
§ 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 | Coderbyte | TalentLens | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 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 | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Coderbyte has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Coderbyte and TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Coderbyte last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TalentLens 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