§ The result
Codility leads Sova Assessment on all 7 criteria.
Codility scores 54 and Sova Assessment 48 under rubric v1.0 — a 6-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Codility is ahead of Sova Assessment on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being FRIA Support at Codility 42 to Sova Assessment 40. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Codility 50, Sova Assessment 40) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Codility 45, Sova Assessment 38), the second being 22% 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
Sova Assessment
Sova Assessment is a UK-based enterprise talent assessment platform combining personality questionnaires, cognitive and ability tests, situational judgement, video interviews, virtual assessment centres and AI-led role simulations into a single occupational-psychology-validated candidate scoring workflow.
§ The record
Codility and Sova Assessment 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 | Sova Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | High |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2009 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 22% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Sova Assessment 38
1.3 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Sova Assessment 40
1.2 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Sova Assessment 55
1.0 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Sova Assessment 55
0.8 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Sova Assessment 52
0.8 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Sova Assessment 62
0.3 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Sova Assessment 40
0.3 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +5.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Sova Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Sova Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 48 (F) | +6 | +5.7 |
§ 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 | Sova Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 8 | 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; Sova Assessment has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sova Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Sova Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sova Assessment last reviewed
- August 2, 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