Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Codility vs HackerRank
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
HackerRank
HackerRank is a technical skills assessment platform for developer hiring that uses coding tests, interviews, and AI-based features (question generation, ML plagiarism/AI-code detection, and image-analysis proctoring) to evaluate candidates.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
HackerRank takes the total, Codility takes more of the criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, HackerRank and Codility finish 1 point apart, 55 to 54, as two Assessment entries. Codility leads more of the criteria than HackerRank — 5 to 1 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which HackerRank leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to HackerRank. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Codility 45, HackerRank 68) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 100% of the weighted advantage HackerRank holds across the 1 criterion it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Codility5
- HackerRank1
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency45 vs 68
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Codility and HackerRank are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Codility | HackerRank |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2009 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight62% of the movement so far
Codility45HackerRank684.1 weighted points to HackerRank
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight78% of the movement so far
Codility42HackerRank351.1 weighted points to Codility
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight87% of the movement so far
Codility50HackerRank450.6 weighted points to Codility
- 4
Customer Documentation
8% weight92% of the movement so far
Codility66HackerRank620.3 weighted points to Codility
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight96% of the movement so far
Codility57HackerRank550.3 weighted points to Codility
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
Codility62HackerRank600.2 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.6 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 -1.6.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus HackerRank, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Codility | HackerRank | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 68 | -23 | -4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 54F | 55F | -1 | -1.6 |
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 | HackerRank | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 4 | 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; HackerRank has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HackerRank sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for HackerRank, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HackerRank 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.