§ The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads CoderPad by 14 points.
Workday Recruiting AI sits 14 points above CoderPad under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 42 — with Workday Recruiting AI filed under ATS-integrated and CoderPad under Assessment. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Workday Recruiting AI: Workday Recruiting AI is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and CoderPad on Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (CoderPad 20, Workday Recruiting AI 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 48% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI holds across the 6 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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
§ The record
CoderPad is filed under Assessment AI, Workday Recruiting AI under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only CoderPad is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CoderPad | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CoderPad 20 · Workday Recruiting AI 60
7.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CoderPad 45 · Workday Recruiting AI 70
5.0 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CoderPad 44 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.1 weighted points to CoderPad
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CoderPad 28 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.1 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CoderPad 57 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
1.0 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CoderPad 58 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.6 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CoderPad 54 · Workday Recruiting AI 55
0.1 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.0 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 -13.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CoderPad minus Workday Recruiting AI.
| Category | Weight | CoderPad | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 70 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 60 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 65 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 35 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 65 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 56 (F) | -14 | -13.8 |
§ 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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 32 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 2 | 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; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 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 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CoderPad last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI last reviewed
- May 21, 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