§ The result
Codility leads CodeSignal on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Codility sits 11 points above CodeSignal under rubric v1.0, 54 against 43, with both filed under Assessment. Codility leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so CodeSignal is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Codility leads is Customer Documentation, CodeSignal 62 to Codility 66. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 38, Codility 60 — and at a 20% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Codility holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
CodeSignal
CodeSignal is a technical skills assessment and interview platform for developer hiring that adds AI features including an AI Interviewer, AI-assisted/agentic coding assessments, and AI-plus-human proctoring.
Vendor profile
Codility
Codility is a technical/coding assessment platform that screens and interviews software engineers with work-sample coding tests, live technical interviews, and integrity tooling including plagiarism and AI-use detection.
§ The record
CodeSignal and Codility 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 | CodeSignal | Codility |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2015 | 2009 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Codility 60
4.4 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · Codility 42
2.5 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Codility 50
1.4 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Codility 57
1.1 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Codility 62
0.8 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Codility 66
0.3 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -10.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Codility.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Codility | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 60 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 45 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 66 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 54 (F) | -11 | -10.6 |
§ 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 | CodeSignal | Codility | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
CodeSignal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Codility has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 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