§ The result
4 points separate Interviewer.AI and CodeSignal.
Interviewer.AI (Video interview) edges CodeSignal (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 47 to 43. Interviewer.AI leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while CodeSignal leads 3, including Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 38, Interviewer.AI 52 — and at a 20% weight it carries 44% of the weighted advantage Interviewer.AI holds across the 4 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
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
§ The record
CodeSignal is filed under Assessment AI, Interviewer.AI under Video interview 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 | Interviewer.AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Interviewer.AI 52
2.8 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Interviewer.AI 35
1.8 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · Interviewer.AI 35
1.5 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Interviewer.AI 60
1.5 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Interviewer.AI 32
0.7 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.6 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Interviewer.AI 58
0.3 weighted points to CodeSignal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Interviewer.AI.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Interviewer.AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 52 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 35 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 47 (F) | -4 | -3.6 |
§ 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 | Interviewer.AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 6 | 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; Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Interviewer.AI 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.
§ Where next