§ The result
Codility leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Codility sits 12 points above Talogy under rubric v1.0, 54 against 42, with both filed under Assessment. Codility is ahead of Talogy on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Data Governance Disclosure at Codility 57 to Talogy 52. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Codility 50, Talogy 32) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Codility 45, Talogy 30), the second being 24% 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
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Codility and Talogy 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 | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2009 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 24% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Talogy 30
2.7 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 46% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Talogy 25
2.5 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Talogy 32
2.2 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Talogy 53
1.4 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Talogy 52
1.2 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Codility 57 · Talogy 52
0.8 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Talogy 58
0.6 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 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 +11.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 53 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 32 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 42 (F) | +12 | +11.4 |
§ 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 | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 22 | 9 | 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; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy 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