§ The result
Retorio takes the total, CodeSignal takes more of the criteria.
Within the Assessment cohort, Retorio edges CodeSignal by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 44 to 43. CodeSignal leads more of the criteria than Retorio — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which Retorio leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Retorio. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 38, Retorio 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 70% of the weighted advantage Retorio 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
Retorio
Video-based AI that analyses words, voice, and facial expression/body language to infer Big Five (OCEAN) personality and behavioural traits.
§ The record
CodeSignal and Retorio are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | Retorio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Retorio 50
2.4 weighted points to Retorio
8% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Retorio 50
1.0 weighted points to CodeSignal
18% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Retorio 40
0.9 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
CodeSignal 25 · Retorio 30
0.8 weighted points to Retorio
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Retorio 33
0.6 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Retorio 52
0.4 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Retorio 52
0.3 weighted points to Retorio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.3 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 -0.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Retorio.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Retorio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| 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 | 50 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 44 (F) | -1 | -0.6 |
§ 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 | Retorio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources 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; Retorio has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Retorio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Retorio, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Retorio 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