§ The result
2 points separate iMocha and Codility.
Within the Assessment cohort, iMocha edges Codility by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 56 to 54. Codility and iMocha each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split iMocha holds (headed by Article 11 Technical Documentation) adds up to more weighted points. iMocha takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Codility 60, iMocha 68), which is 50% of the weighted advantage iMocha holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Data Governance Disclosure, Codility 57 to iMocha 66.
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
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
§ The record
Codility and iMocha 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 | iMocha |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | IN |
| Founded | 2009 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · iMocha 68
1.6 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · iMocha 66
1.3 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · iMocha 38
0.6 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · iMocha 64
0.2 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · iMocha 48
0.2 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · iMocha 44
0.2 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus iMocha.
| Category | Weight | Codility | iMocha | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 68 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 44 | +1 | +0.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 66 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 64 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 66 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 56 (F) | -2 | -2.2 |
§ 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 | iMocha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 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; iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iMocha last reviewed
- July 17, 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