§ The result
Codility leads Mercer | Mettl on all 7 criteria.
Codility sits 12 points above Mercer | Mettl under rubric v1.0, 54 against 42, with both filed under Assessment. Codility leads every one of the 7 criteria, Mercer | Mettl none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Codility 57 to Mercer | Mettl 55. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Codility 60, Mercer | Mettl 38, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage Codility holds across the 7 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
Mercer | Mettl
Mercer | Mettl is an online talent assessment and remote-proctoring platform offering psychometric, aptitude, coding, and skills tests plus AI-assisted exam proctoring and scoring for hiring, certification, and L&D.
§ The record
Codility and Mercer | Mettl 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 | Mercer | Mettl |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | IN |
| Founded | 2009 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Mercer | Mettl 38
4.4 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Mercer | Mettl 28
2.1 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Mercer | Mettl 45
2.0 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Mercer | Mettl 38
1.4 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Mercer | Mettl 52
1.1 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Mercer | Mettl 42
0.5 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Mercer | Mettl 55
0.3 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Mercer | Mettl.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Mercer | Mettl | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 38 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 28 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 52 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 42 (F) | +12 | +11.9 |
§ 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 | Mercer | Mettl | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 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; Mercer | Mettl has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercer | Mettl 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