§ The result
CodeSignal takes the total, Recruitee takes more of the criteria.
CodeSignal (Assessment) edges Recruitee (ATS-integrated) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 43 to 42. Recruitee leads more of the criteria than CodeSignal — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which CodeSignal leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to CodeSignal. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 45, Recruitee 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 89% of the weighted advantage CodeSignal holds across the 2 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
Recruitee
Collaborative applicant tracking system, part of the Tellent group, with AI-assisted features for job-description generation, screening candidates against team-defined criteria, resurfacing past applicants, and summarizing evaluation feedback.
§ The record
CodeSignal is filed under Assessment AI, Recruitee under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only CodeSignal is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | Recruitee |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Recruitee 30
2.7 weighted points to CodeSignal
20% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Recruitee 42
0.8 weighted points to Recruitee
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Recruitee 58
0.4 weighted points to Recruitee
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Recruitee 58
0.3 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · Recruitee 27
0.3 weighted points to Recruitee
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Recruitee 52
0.3 weighted points to Recruitee
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Recruitee 40
0.2 weighted points to Recruitee
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Recruitee.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Recruitee | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 42 (F) | +1 | +1.0 |
§ 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 | Recruitee | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 14 | 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; Recruitee has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 21 for Recruitee, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruitee 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