§ The result
4 points separate CoderPad and impress.ai.
CoderPad holds a 4-point edge over impress.ai under rubric v1.0, 42 to 38, across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. CoderPad leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while impress.ai leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. CoderPad takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (CoderPad 45, impress.ai 35), which is 45% of the weighted advantage CoderPad holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Post-Market Monitoring, CoderPad 44 to impress.ai 32.
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
impress.ai
impress.ai is a Singapore-headquartered recruitment automation platform that uses conversational AI assistants, resume parsing and scoring, and structured competency-based screening to filter, rank and shortlist job candidates, integrating with enterprise ATS systems.
§ The record
CoderPad is filed under Assessment AI, impress.ai under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CoderPad | impress.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CoderPad 45 · impress.ai 35
2.0 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CoderPad 44 · impress.ai 32
1.4 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CoderPad 57 · impress.ai 52
0.6 weighted points to CoderPad
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CoderPad 28 · impress.ai 25
0.4 weighted points to CoderPad
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CoderPad 20 · impress.ai 22
0.4 weighted points to impress.ai
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CoderPad 54 · impress.ai 55
0.1 weighted points to impress.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.0 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 +4.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CoderPad minus impress.ai.
| Category | Weight | CoderPad | impress.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 35 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 32 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 38 (F) | +4 | +4.0 |
§ 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 | impress.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources 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 | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
CoderPad has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 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 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains, and 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CoderPad last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- impress.ai 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