§ The result
4 points separate Codility and Xobin.
Within the Assessment cohort, Codility edges Xobin by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 54 to 50. Codility leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Xobin leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Even Post-Market Monitoring, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Codility 50, Xobin 38, 12% weight), is only 38% of the weighted advantage Codility builds across the 5 criteria it leads.
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
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
§ The record
Codility and Xobin 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 | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | IN |
| Founded | 2009 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Codility 50 · Xobin 38
1.4 weighted points to Codility
15% weight · 59% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Codility 42 · Xobin 35
1.1 weighted points to Codility
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Codility 62 · Xobin 58
0.5 weighted points to Codility
8% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Codility 66 · Xobin 60
0.5 weighted points to Codility
20% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Codility 60 · Xobin 62
0.4 weighted points to Xobin
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Codility 45 · Xobin 43
0.4 weighted points to Codility
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +3.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Codility minus Xobin.
| Category | Weight | Codility | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 43 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 60 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 50 (F) | +4 | +3.4 |
§ 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 | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | Sources 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; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Codility, across 1 distinct source domain, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Codility last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin last reviewed
- September 25, 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