§ The result
Pillar takes the total, DevSkiller takes more of the criteria.
Pillar (Screening) edges DevSkiller (Assessment) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 40 to 39. DevSkiller leads more of the criteria than Pillar — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Pillar leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Pillar. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — DevSkiller 22, Pillar 38 — and at an 18% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Pillar holds across the 3 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
Pillar
Pillar (now "AI Interview Companion by Employ") is an interview intelligence platform that records and transcribes job interviews, generates AI interview guides and highlight clips, and surfaces candidate insights and interviewer-coaching recommendations.
§ The record
DevSkiller is filed under Assessment AI, Pillar under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | DevSkiller | Pillar |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | PL | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · Pillar 38
2.9 weighted points to Pillar
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · Pillar 42
1.4 weighted points to Pillar
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · Pillar 45
1.1 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
DevSkiller 55 · Pillar 48
0.8 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · Pillar 33
0.8 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
DevSkiller 25 · Pillar 30
0.8 weighted points to Pillar
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
DevSkiller 58 · Pillar 50
0.6 weighted points to DevSkiller
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.7 — 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 -1 beside that -1.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus Pillar.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | Pillar | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 38 | -16 | -2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 40 (F) | -1 | -1.7 |
§ 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 | Pillar | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Pillar has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Pillar, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pillar 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