§ The result
Gem takes the total, Codility takes more of the criteria.
Gem (Sourcing) edges Codility (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 55 to 54. Codility leads more of the criteria than Gem — 5 to 1 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Gem leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Gem. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Codility 45, Gem 66 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage Gem holds across the 1 criterion 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
Gem
Gem is an AI-first recruiting platform combining a talent CRM, AI sourcing and outreach automation, candidate engagement, and a newer applicant tracking system with AI-powered application review and ranking.
§ The record
Codility is filed under Assessment AI, Gem 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 | Gem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | High |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Gem 66
3.8 weighted points to Gem
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Gem 35
1.1 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Gem 58
0.4 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Gem 47
0.4 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Gem 62
0.3 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Gem 61
0.1 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Gem.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Gem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 66 | -21 | -3.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 61 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 47 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 55 (F) | -1 | -1.5 |
§ 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 | Gem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 19 | 2 | 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; Gem has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Gem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 21 for Gem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Gem last reviewed
- June 7, 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