§ The result
Codility leads DevSkiller on all 7 criteria.
Codility finishes 15 points clear of DevSkiller inside the Assessment cohort under rubric v1.0: 54 against 39. Codility leads every one of the 7 criteria, DevSkiller none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Codility 57 to DevSkiller 52. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Codility 60, DevSkiller 35, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Codility holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
DevSkiller
DevSkiller (now branded SkillPanel) provides technical skills assessment and coding tests that automatically score developer candidates on real-world work-sample tasks using hidden verification unit tests and static code analysis.
§ The record
Codility and DevSkiller are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Codility | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | PL |
| Founded | 2009 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · DevSkiller 35
5.0 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · DevSkiller 22
4.1 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · DevSkiller 25
2.5 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · DevSkiller 40
1.2 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · DevSkiller 55
0.8 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · DevSkiller 52
0.8 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · DevSkiller 58
0.6 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +15.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Codility | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 35 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 22 | +23 | +4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 39 (F) | +15 | +15.1 |
§ 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 | Codility | DevSkiller | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Codility has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- DevSkiller 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