§ The result
Darwinbox leads DevSkiller by 7 points.
Darwinbox scores 46 and DevSkiller 39 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of Darwinbox, with 1 level: Darwinbox is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and DevSkiller on Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Darwinbox 60, DevSkiller 35) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 65% of the weighted advantage Darwinbox holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
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
Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, DevSkiller under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only DevSkiller is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Darwinbox | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | PL |
| Founded | 2015 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · DevSkiller 35
5.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
18% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · DevSkiller 22
1.1 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · DevSkiller 52
0.9 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · DevSkiller 25
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · DevSkiller 40
0.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · DevSkiller 58
0.1 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +7.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +7.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 35 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 22 | +6 | +1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 39 (F) | +7 | +7.1 |
§ 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 | Darwinbox | DevSkiller | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 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 DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox 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