§ The result
Gloat leads CoderPad by 5 points.
Gloat scores 47 and CoderPad 42 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Gloat leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while CoderPad leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (CoderPad 20, Gloat 38) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 60% of the weighted advantage Gloat holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
CoderPad
CoderPad is a technical hiring platform that auto-scores and ranks candidates on coding assessments (Screen), uses an AI reviewer to evaluate and rank applicants' asynchronous video pre-screen responses against employer criteria (Qualify), and hosts live collaborative coding interviews with AI assistance, note-taking and summaries (Interview).
Vendor profile
Gloat
Gloat is an AI-powered internal talent marketplace and "agentic HR" platform that matches an employer's existing employees to internal job openings, gigs, projects, mentorships, and learning based on inferred skills and career goals.
§ The record
CoderPad is filed under Assessment AI, Gloat under Candidate sourcing 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 | CoderPad | Gloat |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CoderPad 20 · Gloat 38
3.2 weighted points to Gloat
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CoderPad 45 · Gloat 48
0.6 weighted points to Gloat
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CoderPad 54 · Gloat 58
0.6 weighted points to Gloat
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CoderPad 57 · Gloat 62
0.6 weighted points to Gloat
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CoderPad 58 · Gloat 62
0.3 weighted points to Gloat
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CoderPad 44 · Gloat 42
0.2 weighted points to CoderPad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -5.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CoderPad minus Gloat.
| Category | Weight | CoderPad | Gloat | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 38 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 28 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 58 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 42 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 47 (F) | -5 | -5.1 |
§ 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 | CoderPad | Gloat | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 32 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
CoderPad has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Gloat has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for CoderPad sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains, and 29 for Gloat, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CoderPad last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 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