§ The result
Sapia.ai leads CoderPad on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under Assessment, Sapia.ai and CoderPad come out 56 and 42 under rubric v1.0, 14 points in favour of Sapia.ai. Of the 7 criteria CoderPad wins none, and the narrowest lead Sapia.ai holds is on Customer Documentation, CoderPad 58 to Sapia.ai 62. The advantage Sapia.ai holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (CoderPad 20, Sapia.ai 52, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 39% of the weighted points Sapia.ai gains across the 7 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
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
§ The record
CoderPad and Sapia.ai 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 | CoderPad | Sapia.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2013 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CoderPad 20 · Sapia.ai 52
5.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
20% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CoderPad 45 · Sapia.ai 70
5.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CoderPad 54 · Sapia.ai 62
1.2 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CoderPad 28 · Sapia.ai 35
1.1 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CoderPad 44 · Sapia.ai 50
0.7 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CoderPad 57 · Sapia.ai 62
0.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CoderPad 58 · Sapia.ai 62
0.3 weighted points to Sapia.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -14.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CoderPad minus Sapia.ai.
| Category | Weight | CoderPad | Sapia.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 70 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 52 | -32 | -5.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 62 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 50 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 56 (F) | -14 | -14.7 |
§ 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 | CoderPad | Sapia.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 32 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
CoderPad has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for CoderPad and Sapia.ai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CoderPad last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sapia.ai 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