§ The result
CodeSignal leads Intervue.io on all 7 criteria.
CodeSignal sits 12 points above Intervue.io under rubric v1.0 — 43 against 31 — with CodeSignal filed under Assessment and Intervue.io under Video interview. CodeSignal leads every one of the 7 criteria, Intervue.io none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, CodeSignal 55 to Intervue.io 54. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (CodeSignal 45, Intervue.io 12) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage CodeSignal holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
§ The record
CodeSignal is filed under Assessment AI, Intervue.io 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 | Intervue.io |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2015 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Intervue.io 12
5.9 weighted points to CodeSignal
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Intervue.io 28
2.0 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Intervue.io 38
1.8 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Intervue.io 30
1.0 weighted points to CodeSignal
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Intervue.io 50
1.0 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · Intervue.io 22
0.4 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Intervue.io 54
0.1 weighted points to CodeSignal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Intervue.io.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Intervue.io | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 28 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 12 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 22 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 31 (F) | +12 | +12.2 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 7 | Sources 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; Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Intervue.io 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