§ The result
CodeSignal leads RecruitBot by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, CodeSignal, filed under Assessment, finishes on 43 and RecruitBot, filed under Sourcing, on 37, 6 points apart. CodeSignal leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while RecruitBot leads 2, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 45, RecruitBot 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 63% of the weighted advantage CodeSignal 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
RecruitBot
RecruitBot is an AI sourcing platform that searches a proprietary database of 655M+ candidate profiles, re-ranks results with machine learning trained on each recruiter's star ratings, and automates personalized email outreach.
§ The record
CodeSignal is filed under Assessment AI, RecruitBot under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only CodeSignal is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | RecruitBot |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · RecruitBot 22
4.1 weighted points to CodeSignal
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · RecruitBot 33
1.0 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · RecruitBot 50
0.6 weighted points to CodeSignal
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · RecruitBot 55
0.6 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · RecruitBot 27
0.3 weighted points to RecruitBot
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · RecruitBot 48
0.3 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · RecruitBot 40
0.2 weighted points to RecruitBot
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus RecruitBot.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | RecruitBot | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 22 | +23 | +4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 37 (F) | +6 | +6.1 |
§ 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 | RecruitBot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 6 | 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; RecruitBot has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for RecruitBot sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for RecruitBot, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- RecruitBot 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