HomeCompareCovey vs DevSkiller

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Covey vs DevSkiller

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Covey leads DevSkiller by 8 points.

Covey scores 47 and DevSkiller 39 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Covey and DevSkiller each lead 2 of the 7 criteria, with 3 level, though the side of the split Covey holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Covey 72, DevSkiller 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 90% of the weighted advantage Covey holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Covey is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, DevSkiller under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only DevSkiller is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCoveyDevSkiller
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSPL
Founded20182014

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Covey 72 · DevSkiller 22

    9.0 weighted points to Covey

  2. 12% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Covey 30 · DevSkiller 40

    1.2 weighted points to DevSkiller

  3. 20% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Covey 40 · DevSkiller 35

    1.0 weighted points to Covey

  4. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Covey 52 · DevSkiller 55

    0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +8.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.4.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Covey minus DevSkiller.

CategoryWeightCoveyDevSkillerΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4035+5+1.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%7222+50+9.0
FRIA Support15%2525--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5252--
Human Oversight Design12%5255-3-0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%3040-10-1.2
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%47 (F)39 (F)+8+8.4

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCoveyDevSkiller
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%11Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%20Audit reportSources on a separate domain01
FRIA Support15%0111Sources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%0130Audit reportSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%11Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%0120Sources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%20Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on a separate domain
All criteria100%65Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain114Audit reportSources on a separate domain

Covey has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 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 Covey and DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 26 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Covey, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Covey last reviewed
June 7, 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.