§ The result
Codility leads HackerEarth on all 7 criteria.
Codility finishes 8 points ahead of HackerEarth under rubric v1.0, 54 to 46, both scored as Assessment entries. Codility is ahead of HackerEarth on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Article 11 Technical Documentation at Codility 60 to HackerEarth 55. The advantage Codility holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Codility 45, HackerEarth 35, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 24% of the weighted points Codility gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
HackerEarth
HackerEarth is a technical-hiring platform that auto-scores coding assessments under AI proctoring, runs FaceCode live coding interviews with AI-generated summaries, and offers OnScreen, an AI video-avatar interviewer that scores candidates against a fixed rubric.
§ The record
Codility and HackerEarth are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Codility | HackerEarth |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 24% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · HackerEarth 35
1.8 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · HackerEarth 32
1.5 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · HackerEarth 55
1.0 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · HackerEarth 42
1.0 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · HackerEarth 52
0.8 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · HackerEarth 56
0.7 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · HackerEarth 57
0.7 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +7.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus HackerEarth.
| Category | Weight | Codility | HackerEarth | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 35 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 32 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 56 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 57 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 46 (F) | +8 | +7.4 |
§ 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 | HackerEarth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 the vendor's own 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 34 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Codility has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; HackerEarth has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 39 for HackerEarth, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HackerEarth 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