§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads CodeSignal by 13 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand sits 13 points above CodeSignal under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 43 — with Cornerstone OnDemand filed under ATS-integrated and CodeSignal under Assessment. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while CodeSignal leads 1, including Customer Documentation, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 38, Cornerstone OnDemand 72 — and at a 20% weight it carries 52% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 5 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
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
§ The record
CodeSignal is filed under Assessment AI, Cornerstone OnDemand under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | Cornerstone OnDemand |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1999 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Cornerstone OnDemand 72
6.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Cornerstone OnDemand 58
2.3 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · Cornerstone OnDemand 35
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Cornerstone OnDemand 45
0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60
0.2 weighted points to CodeSignal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -12.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -12.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Cornerstone OnDemand.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Cornerstone OnDemand | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 72 | -34 | -6.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 56 (F) | -13 | -12.8 |
§ 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 | CodeSignal | Cornerstone OnDemand | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 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% | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
CodeSignal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
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 Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cornerstone OnDemand 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.