§ The result
3 points separate Korn Ferry and CodeSignal.
Within the Assessment cohort, Korn Ferry edges CodeSignal by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 46 to 43. CodeSignal and Korn Ferry each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Korn Ferry holds (headed by Article 11 Technical Documentation) adds up to more weighted points. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 38, Korn Ferry 58 — and at a 20% weight it carries 83% of the weighted advantage Korn Ferry holds across the 3 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
Korn Ferry
Korn Ferry provides psychometric talent assessments (Korn Ferry Assess, the KF4D Four Dimensional assessment, KFALP leadership-potential assessment, and the Leadership Architect competency framework) used to evaluate candidates' personality, competencies, drivers, and cognitive ability for selection, promotion, and development decisions.
§ The record
CodeSignal and Korn Ferry 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 | Korn Ferry |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1969 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Korn Ferry 58
4.0 weighted points to Korn Ferry
8% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Korn Ferry 52
0.8 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Korn Ferry 33
0.6 weighted points to CodeSignal
18% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Korn Ferry 48
0.5 weighted points to Korn Ferry
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Korn Ferry 52
0.4 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Korn Ferry 52
0.3 weighted points to Korn Ferry
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -3.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Korn Ferry.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Korn Ferry | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 46 (F) | -3 | -3.1 |
§ 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 | Korn Ferry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 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 | 10 | 7 | 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; Korn Ferry has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Korn Ferry, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Korn Ferry 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