§ The result
iMocha leads CodeSignal by 13 points.
iMocha sits 13 points above CodeSignal under rubric v1.0, 56 against 43, with both filed under Assessment. iMocha leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while CodeSignal leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 38, iMocha 68 — and at a 20% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage iMocha 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
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
§ The record
CodeSignal and iMocha are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | iMocha |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · iMocha 68
6.0 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · iMocha 66
2.4 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · iMocha 38
1.9 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · iMocha 48
1.2 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · iMocha 64
1.1 weighted points to iMocha
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · iMocha 66
0.3 weighted points to iMocha
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · iMocha 44
0.2 weighted points to CodeSignal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 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 iMocha.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | iMocha | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 68 | -30 | -6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 66 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 64 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 66 | -4 | -0.3 |
| 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 | iMocha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 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; iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iMocha 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