§ The result
Codility leads Draup on all 7 criteria.
Codility sits 12 points above Draup under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 42 — with Codility filed under Assessment and Draup under Sourcing. Codility leads every one of the 7 criteria, Draup none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Codility 57 to Draup 54. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Codility 50, Draup 28, 12% weight), but it accounts for only 23% 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
Draup
Draup is an AI-powered talent- and sales-intelligence platform that aggregates over a billion public professional profiles into skills, roles and labour-market analytics, and surfaces ranked candidate shortlists for enterprise workforce planning and recruiting.
§ The record
Codility is filed under Assessment AI, Draup under Candidate sourcing 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 Codility is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Codility | Draup |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Draup 28
2.6 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 46% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Draup 25
2.5 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Draup 48
2.4 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Draup 33
2.2 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Draup 57
0.7 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Draup 58
0.5 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Draup 54
0.4 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Draup.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Draup | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 33 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 54 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 28 | +22 | +2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 57 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 42 (F) | +12 | +11.4 |
§ 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 | Draup | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 7 | 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; Draup has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Draup sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 30 for Draup, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Draup last reviewed
- August 2, 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