§ The result
DevSkiller leads Entelo on 6 of the 7 criteria.
DevSkiller scores 39 and Entelo 33 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. DevSkiller leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Entelo is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 DevSkiller leads is Bias Audit Transparency, DevSkiller 22 to Entelo 20. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (DevSkiller 58, Entelo 40) and Human Oversight Design at 12% (DevSkiller 55, Entelo 42), the second being 26% of the weighted advantage DevSkiller holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Entelo
Entelo is an AI-powered talent sourcing and diversity-recruiting platform that aggregates hundreds of millions of public candidate profiles and applies predictive machine-learning models to score, rank, and surface (including underrepresented) candidates for recruiters.
§ The record
DevSkiller is filed under Assessment AI, Entelo under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only DevSkiller is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | DevSkiller | Entelo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | PL | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2011 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
DevSkiller 55 · Entelo 42
1.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
8% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
DevSkiller 58 · Entelo 40
1.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · Entelo 45
1.1 weighted points to DevSkiller
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · Entelo 30
1.0 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · Entelo 35
0.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · Entelo 20
0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus Entelo.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | Entelo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 33 (F) | +6 | +6.0 |
§ 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 | DevSkiller | Entelo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 9 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Entelo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 8 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 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Entelo, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Entelo last reviewed
- June 7, 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