§ The result
DevSkiller leads Moonhub on 6 of the 7 criteria.
DevSkiller scores 39 and Moonhub 30 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. DevSkiller leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Moonhub is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 DevSkiller leads is Bias Audit Transparency, DevSkiller 22 to Moonhub 18. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (DevSkiller 58, Moonhub 38) and Post-Market Monitoring at 12% (DevSkiller 40, Moonhub 22), the second being 27% 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
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
DevSkiller is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub 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 | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | PL | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · Moonhub 22
2.2 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · Moonhub 40
1.8 weighted points to DevSkiller
8% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
DevSkiller 58 · Moonhub 38
1.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · Moonhub 30
1.0 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
DevSkiller 55 · Moonhub 48
0.8 weighted points to DevSkiller
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · Moonhub 18
0.7 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +8.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.1 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 +8.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 18 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 22 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 38 | +20 | +1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 30 (F) | +9 | +8.1 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 6 | 7 | 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; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 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 28 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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