§ The result
3 points separate CoderPad and Workstream.
CoderPad (Assessment) edges Workstream (Screening) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 42 to 39. CoderPad leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Workstream leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. The advantage CoderPad holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (CoderPad 44, Workstream 35, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 31% of the weighted points CoderPad gains 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
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
CoderPad is filed under Assessment AI, Workstream 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 | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CoderPad 44 · Workstream 35
1.1 weighted points to CoderPad
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CoderPad 54 · Workstream 47
1.1 weighted points to CoderPad
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CoderPad 45 · Workstream 40
1.0 weighted points to CoderPad
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CoderPad 57 · Workstream 61
0.5 weighted points to Workstream
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CoderPad 58 · Workstream 56
0.2 weighted points to CoderPad
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CoderPad 28 · Workstream 27
0.1 weighted points to CoderPad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +3.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +3.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CoderPad minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | CoderPad | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 27 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 47 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 61 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 35 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 39 (F) | +3 | +3.0 |
§ 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 | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 5 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 28 | 6 | Sources 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; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for CoderPad and Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 72 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for CoderPad, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CoderPad last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream last reviewed
- September 25, 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