§ The result
DevSkiller leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
DevSkiller scores 39 and Cognisess 30 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. DevSkiller is ahead of Cognisess on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Cognisess 20 to DevSkiller 22. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Cognisess 40, DevSkiller 58) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cognisess 25, DevSkiller 35), 23% of the weighted advantage DevSkiller builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
Vendor profile
DevSkiller
DevSkiller (now branded SkillPanel) provides technical skills assessment and coding tests that automatically score developer candidates on real-world work-sample tasks using hidden verification unit tests and static code analysis.
§ The record
Cognisess and DevSkiller 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 | Cognisess | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | PL |
| Founded | 2011 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · DevSkiller 35
2.0 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · DevSkiller 55
1.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · DevSkiller 52
1.5 weighted points to DevSkiller
8% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · DevSkiller 58
1.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · DevSkiller 40
1.0 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · DevSkiller 25
0.8 weighted points to DevSkiller
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · DevSkiller 22
0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -8.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 39 (F) | -9 | -8.6 |
§ 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 | Cognisess | DevSkiller | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 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