§ The result
Findem leads DevSkiller on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Findem finishes 19 points clear of DevSkiller under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 39 — across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Findem leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so DevSkiller is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Findem leads is Post-Market Monitoring, DevSkiller 40 to Findem 42. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — DevSkiller 22, Findem 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Findem 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
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
§ The record
DevSkiller is filed under Assessment AI, Findem 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 | Findem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | PL | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · Findem 83
11.0 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · Findem 58
4.6 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
DevSkiller 25 · Findem 38
1.9 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · Findem 57
0.8 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
DevSkiller 55 · Findem 60
0.6 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · Findem 42
0.2 weighted points to Findem
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -19.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -19.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus Findem.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | Findem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 58 | -23 | -4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 83 | -61 | -11.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 58 (F) | -19 | -19.1 |
§ 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 | DevSkiller | Findem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for DevSkiller and Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 32 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Findem 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