§ The result
Codility leads Feenyx on all 7 criteria.
Codility sits 14 points above Feenyx under rubric v1.0, 54 against 40, with both filed under Assessment. Of the 7 criteria Feenyx wins none, and the narrowest lead Codility holds is on Human Oversight Design, Codility 62 to Feenyx 58. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Codility 45, Feenyx 25) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Codility 60, Feenyx 42), the second being 26% 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
Feenyx
Feenyx (formerly Filtered.ai) is a skills-assessment and interview platform that runs AI-scored asynchronous coding, video and written assessments and AI-assisted live interviews, with resume scoring, candidate matching, identity verification and fraud/AI-use detection.
§ The record
Codility and Feenyx 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 | Feenyx |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Feenyx 42
3.6 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Feenyx 25
3.6 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Feenyx 25
2.5 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Feenyx 38
1.4 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Feenyx 50
1.1 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Feenyx 55
0.9 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Feenyx 58
0.5 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +13.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +13.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Feenyx.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Feenyx | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 42 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 25 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +0.9 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 40 (F) | +14 | +13.6 |
§ 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 | Codility | Feenyx | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources 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 | 8 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 5 | Audit reportSources 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; Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Feenyx sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Feenyx 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