§ The result
Codility leads Crosschq by 7 points.
Codility scores 54 and Crosschq 47 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of Codility, with 1 level: Codility is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Crosschq on Data Governance Disclosure. FRIA Support is the widest raw gap (Codility 42, Crosschq 30) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Codility 60, Crosschq 50), 30% of the weighted advantage Codility builds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Codility
Codility is a technical/coding assessment platform that screens and interviews software engineers with work-sample coding tests, live technical interviews, and integrity tooling including plagiarism and AI-use detection.
Vendor profile
Crosschq
Crosschq is a hiring-intelligence platform that combines automated 360 reference checks, an AI Interview Agent that conducts and scores voice/video screening interviews, AI resume matching and ranking, candidate-fraud and identity checks, Traitify personality and cognitive assessments, and quality-of-hire analytics.
§ The record
Codility is filed under Assessment AI, Crosschq under Screening 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 | Codility | Crosschq |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Crosschq 50
2.0 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Crosschq 30
1.8 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Crosschq 38
1.3 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Crosschq 40
1.2 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Crosschq 62
0.3 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Crosschq 58
0.1 weighted points to Crosschq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.7 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 +6.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Crosschq.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Crosschq | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 47 (F) | +7 | +6.4 |
§ 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 | Codility | Crosschq | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | 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 | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Codility has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Crosschq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Crosschq 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