§ The result
2 points separate Sapia.ai and Codility.
Within the Assessment cohort, Sapia.ai edges Codility by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 56 to 54. Sapia.ai leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Codility leads 2, including FRIA Support, and 2 are level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Codility 60, Sapia.ai 70 — and at a 20% weight it carries 50% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 3 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
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
§ The record
Codility and Sapia.ai 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 | Sapia.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | AU |
| Founded | 2009 | 2013 |
§ 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 · Sapia.ai 70
2.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Sapia.ai 52
1.3 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Sapia.ai 35
1.1 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Sapia.ai 62
0.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Sapia.ai 62
0.3 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -2.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.4 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 -2.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Sapia.ai.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Sapia.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 70 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 56 (F) | -2 | -2.6 |
§ 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 | Sapia.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 3 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 16 | 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; Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sapia.ai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sapia.ai 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