§ The result
Codility leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Codility finishes 24 points clear of Moonhub under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 30 — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Codility leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Moonhub leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Codility 60, Moonhub 30, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 26% 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
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Codility is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing 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 | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Moonhub 30
6.0 weighted points to Codility
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Moonhub 18
4.9 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Moonhub 22
3.4 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Moonhub 25
2.5 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Moonhub 40
2.5 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Moonhub 38
2.2 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Moonhub 48
1.7 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +23.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +24 beside that +23.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 30 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 18 | +27 | +4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 40 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 22 | +28 | +3.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 38 | +28 | +2.2 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 30 (F) | +24 | +23.2 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 6 | 7 | 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; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 33 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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