§ The result
2 points separate Radancy and DevSkiller.
Radancy (Sourcing) edges DevSkiller (Assessment) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 41 to 39. Radancy leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while DevSkiller leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — DevSkiller 35, Radancy 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 44% of the weighted advantage Radancy holds across the 5 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
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
DevSkiller is filed under Assessment AI, Radancy 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, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | DevSkiller | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | PL | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
DevSkiller 35 · Radancy 42
1.4 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
DevSkiller 52 · Radancy 58
0.9 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
DevSkiller 40 · Radancy 36
0.5 weighted points to DevSkiller
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
DevSkiller 25 · Radancy 28
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
18% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
DevSkiller 22 · Radancy 20
0.4 weighted points to DevSkiller
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
DevSkiller 55 · Radancy 57
0.2 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
DevSkiller 58 · Radancy 60
0.2 weighted points to Radancy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is DevSkiller minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | DevSkiller | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 36 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 41 (F) | -2 | -2.3 |
§ 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 | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 16 | 6 | 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; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 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 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- DevSkiller last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy last reviewed
- August 2, 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