§ The result
Coderbyte leads Turing by 6 points.
Inside the Assessment cohort, rubric v1.0 puts Coderbyte on 42 and Turing on 36, 6 points apart. Turing takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Coderbyte, whose share includes Data Governance Disclosure. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Coderbyte 60, Turing 45) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Coderbyte 56, Turing 44), the second being 24% of the weighted advantage Coderbyte holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
Coderbyte and Turing are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Coderbyte | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 20% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Coderbyte 56 · Turing 44
1.8 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Coderbyte 60 · Turing 45
1.8 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Coderbyte 40 · Turing 27
1.6 weighted points to Coderbyte
18% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Coderbyte 20 · Turing 28
1.4 weighted points to Turing
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Coderbyte 33 · Turing 25
1.2 weighted points to Coderbyte
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Coderbyte 58 · Turing 48
0.8 weighted points to Coderbyte
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Coderbyte 44 · Turing 42
0.4 weighted points to Coderbyte
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Coderbyte minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | Coderbyte | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 42 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 28 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 25 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 44 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 45 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 27 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 36 (F) | +6 | +6.1 |
§ 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 | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 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 | 8 | 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; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 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 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Coderbyte last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing 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