§ The result
CodeSignal leads Turing by 7 points.
CodeSignal scores 43 and Turing 36 under rubric v1.0 — a 7-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. CodeSignal leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Turing leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — CodeSignal 45, Turing 28 — and at an 18% weight it carries 40% 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
Turing
Turing is an AI-powered talent platform that vets software engineers through automated multi-stage technical assessments and uses machine-learned ranking to score, match, and place them with client companies.
§ The record
CodeSignal and Turing are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | CodeSignal | Turing |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
CodeSignal 45 · Turing 28
3.1 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
CodeSignal 38 · Turing 27
1.3 weighted points to CodeSignal
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
CodeSignal 55 · Turing 45
1.2 weighted points to CodeSignal
8% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
CodeSignal 62 · Turing 48
1.1 weighted points to CodeSignal
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
CodeSignal 50 · Turing 44
0.9 weighted points to CodeSignal
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
CodeSignal 38 · Turing 42
0.8 weighted points to Turing
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is CodeSignal minus Turing.
| Category | Weight | CodeSignal | Turing | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 28 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 44 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 45 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 27 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 36 (F) | +7 | +6.8 |
§ 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 | Turing | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 8 | 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; Turing has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for CodeSignal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Turing, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- CodeSignal last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Turing 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