§ The result
Greenhouse leads Codility by 13 points.
Greenhouse sits 13 points above Codility under rubric v1.0 — 67 (D) against 54 (F) — with Greenhouse filed under ATS-integrated and Codility under Assessment. Greenhouse leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Codility leads 1, including Customer Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Codility 45, Greenhouse 86 — and at an 18% weight it carries 55% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 5 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
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
§ The record
Codility is filed under Assessment AI, Greenhouse under ATS-integrated 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 | Greenhouse |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Greenhouse 86
7.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Greenhouse 78
3.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Greenhouse 64
1.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Greenhouse 58
1.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Greenhouse 66
0.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Greenhouse 64
0.2 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -13.3 — 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 -13 beside that -13.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Greenhouse.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Greenhouse | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 78 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 86 | -41 | -7.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 64 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 66 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 64 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 67 (D) | -13 | -13.3 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 16 | 1 | 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; Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Greenhouse 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