§ The result
Wonderlic takes the total, Coderbyte takes more of the criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Wonderlic and Coderbyte finish 1 point apart, 43 to 42, as two Assessment entries. Coderbyte leads more of the criteria, 5 against 2 for Wonderlic, yet Wonderlic takes Bias Audit Transparency, which carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Coderbyte 20, Wonderlic 48 — and at an 18% weight it carries 76% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 2 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
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
§ The record
Coderbyte and Wonderlic 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 | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Coderbyte 20 · Wonderlic 48
5.0 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Coderbyte 56 · Wonderlic 38
2.7 weighted points to Coderbyte
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Coderbyte 44 · Wonderlic 52
1.6 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Coderbyte 33 · Wonderlic 25
1.2 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Coderbyte 60 · Wonderlic 52
1.0 weighted points to Coderbyte
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Coderbyte 40 · Wonderlic 33
0.8 weighted points to Coderbyte
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Coderbyte 58 · Wonderlic 55
0.2 weighted points to Coderbyte
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Coderbyte minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Coderbyte | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 52 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 48 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 25 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 38 | +18 | +2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 43 (F) | -1 | -0.7 |
§ 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 | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 9 | 6 | 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; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 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 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Coderbyte, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Coderbyte last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic 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