CoderPad
HireAIScore rates CoderPad 42 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed September 25, 2026. CoderPad ranks 61 of 82 vendors rated in Assessment AI, against a category average of 46. That score is drawn from 38 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for CoderPad — 32 with a cited source, 6 recording that nothing was located.
Score breakdown
CoderPad, criterion by criterion
Each rubric criterion is scored out of 100 on the cited evidence, then weighted into the total.
Weighted contribution shown to the right of each bar.
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Weight 20% · category avg 50
45
+9.0
Bias Audit Transparency
Weight 18% · category avg 41
20
+3.6
FRIA Support
Weight 15% · category avg 31
28
+4.2
Data Governance Disclosure
Weight 15% · category avg 53
54
+8.1
Human Oversight Design
Weight 12% · category avg 55
57
+6.8
Post-Market Monitoring
Weight 12% · category avg 38
44
+5.3
Customer Documentation
Weight 8% · category avg 58
58
+4.6
Total weighted score
41.7(rounded to 42 for display)
Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 82 Assessment AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.
Strongest criterion
Customer Documentation
58raw / 100
Contributes 4.6 to the total. 58 against a 58 category average.
Weakest criterion
Bias Audit Transparency
20raw / 100
Contributes 3.6 to the total. 20 against a 41 category average.
Cited evidence
The evidence behind the score
Every score is backed by at least one cited piece of evidence. Open a criterion to see what was found, when, and where.
Download diligence recordEvidence ledger
- Items
- 38
- Documentation
- 23
- Public statement
- 9
- Absence
- 6
- With a source URL
- 32 of 38
- Source hostnames
- 4
- Fewest items
- 4
- FRIA Support
These figures measure how thoroughly CoderPad was reviewed, not how CoderPad performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.
Article 11 Technical Documentation
5 items45
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
CoderPad's AI Policy (published July 2026) sets out its principles (no automated hiring decisions, AI output labelled in the product, purpose limitation), five purposes for AI, the named providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta, Microsoft, AWS, Intercom) and its data-handling commitments, but candidate evaluation and ranking is not among the purposes.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The 21-page CoderPad Screen Score Guide explains outcome-based autograding against test cases, how the percentile benchmark is built from historical success rates and a simulated leaderboard, and what triggers unusual-activity alerts, and it states that no AI is used to evaluate or decide candidate scores.
https://coderpad.io/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-CoderPad-Score-Guide.pdf
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The EU-based candidate terms (updated 28 July 2026) set out Screen's scoring logic: points are assigned automatically, multiple-choice answers are matched against expected choices, open-ended answers are matched by keywords or regular expressions, code is run against hidden test cases, and the candidate ranking is shared with the recruiter.
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The Qualify product page markets 'the AI reviewer' that 'automatically ranks candidates based on your evaluation criteria', but no technical description of how that AI works is published anywhere.
- AbsenceCaptured Sep 25, 2026
No model or system card, Annex IV-style technical pack, validation study or ISO 42001 certificate was found for Qualify or Benchmark AI; the coderpad.io docs sitemap (132 pages) has no Qualify page, and the Qualify and Benchmark AI product pages describe only outcomes.
Bias Audit Transparency
7 items20
- AbsenceCaptured Sep 25, 2026
No NYC LL 144 bias audit, independent audit or adverse-impact analysis was found for Qualify, Benchmark AI or Screen after searching coderpad.io's page, doc, blog, event and case-study sitemaps, the AI policy, the security page, the docs hub and the policies hub; trust.warden-ai.com/coderpad returned 404, and the Vanta trust center shows only a request-access form.
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Qualify is marketed as giving 'consistent, fair evaluations' and AI-generated candidate rankings, with no published bias or validity evidence.
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Benchmark AI claims to turn subjective impressions into 'objective rankings' with 'no more interviewer bias', without citing any testing.
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The AI Interview Designer page claims realistic multi-file projects 'improve predictive validity' but cites no validation study, data or method.
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
A July 2026 CoderPad blog post tells buyers that NYC LL 144 requires annual third-party bias audits and that they should verify compliance documentation before procurement (written about HireVue), yet CoderPad publishes no such audit for its own AI ranking product.
https://coderpad.io/blog/announcements/best-technical-assessment-software-for-hr-teams-in-2026/
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
CoderPad's cheating-prevention FAQ acknowledges that proctoring methods 'have been shown to introduce bias' and says details of its plagiarism-detection engine are shared only under an NDA.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Test Insights analytics show score distributions and completion rates but have no demographic, adverse-impact or fairness breakdown.
FRIA Support
4 items28
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The AI policy says CoderPad aims to comply with AI regulations 'including the EU AI Act' but gives deployers no risk classification, intended-purpose statement or Article 26/27 guidance.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
A public GDPR Article 28 DPA (updated 28 July 2026, for former CodinGame and 'Screen EU only' customers) lists data categories including scores and rankings, webcam images and transcripts, along with processing locations, SCC transfers and retention, which helps a deployer's DPIA but is not FRIA guidance.
https://coderpad.io/codingame-only-data-processing-agreement/
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
CoderPad runs a Vanta-hosted Trust Center, but checked in a real browser it shows only a request-access form for 'Enterprise customers & prospects only', with no public documents.
- AbsenceCaptured Sep 25, 2026
No FRIA template, EU AI Act deployer guide, or intended-use or system card for Qualify, Screen or Benchmark AI was found in the coderpad.io sitemaps, the policies hub, the docs hub, the FAQ page or the blog.
Data Governance Disclosure
6 items54
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The security page cites a SOC 2 Type 2 report issued by Insight Assurance, internal policies 'based on the ISO 27000 framework' (no ISO 27001 certificate is claimed), GDPR and CCPA compliance, AES256 encryption at rest, TLS 1.2 or higher in transit, a CISSP-certified CISO, a Data Privacy Officer and yearly external penetration tests.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The AI policy says prompts, inputs and outputs are not used to train AI providers' models, that providers may keep data for about 30 days for abuse monitoring only, and that AI outputs are stored in CoderPad's own systems.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The subprocessor list (updated September 2026) splits US and EU processing sites and names OpenAI (transcript summary) and Microsoft (audio transcription) as its only AI processors, with no processor listed for Qualify's analysis, Benchmark AI or proctoring image analysis.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Screen admins can set schedules for anonymizing candidates, deleting candidates and deleting images, choose EU or US storage, and route candidates' data requests to their own Data Privacy Officer.
https://coderpad.io/resources/docs/screen/account-management/configure-data-protection/
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The privacy policy (revised 4 December 2024) caps webcam image retention at 90 days, says inferences about protected characteristics from interview video will not be processed, cites the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, and states that no automated decision-making or profiling is used.
- AbsenceCaptured Sep 25, 2026
No disclosure of training data, input features, excluded attributes or subgroup performance metrics was found for Qualify's AI reviewer or Benchmark AI across the AI policy, privacy policy, subprocessor list, DPA, security page and docs hub.
Human Oversight Design
6 items57
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The AI policy commits that 'AI is never used to make an automated hiring decision', says AI-generated content is labelled in the product, and lets admins enable or disable most AI features in organization settings.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Reviewers can flip an auto-graded question from incorrect to correct, which updates the candidate's overall score, though not for multiple-choice questions.
https://coderpad.io/resources/docs/screen/candidate-reports/fixing-an-incorrectly-marked-question/
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Webcam proctoring's optional AI analysis flags no face, multiple faces or a different face as alerts with snapshots for human review, and candidates are not blocked from the test if their webcam is off.
https://coderpad.io/resources/docs/screen/tests/cheating-prevention-detection/webcam-proctoring/
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Interview's AI Notetaker requires each call participant to opt in to transcription, and the call goes ahead normally for anyone who declines.
https://coderpad.io/resources/docs/interview/pads/live-interview-transcription/
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The accessibility doc claims WCAG 2.2 AA for the Screen IDE and lets recruiters extend or remove time limits as accommodations.
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Qualify says 'AI automatically ranks candidates' and that candidates 'get evaluated immediately after submission', with no public documentation of review requirements, override controls or how the rankings are explained.
Post-Market Monitoring
5 items44
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
CoderPad runs a public Atlassian Statuspage with Web Tier and Execution Tier components, latency metrics, and email, SMS, Slack and RSS update subscriptions.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The public incident feed lists 50 incidents from August 2022 to September 2026, including AI-feature outages (Anthropic models unavailable in AI Assist, March 2026; upstream issues hitting AI Assist, June 2025), but none carries a postmortem.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
A vulnerability disclosure policy (updated July 2026) gives a bug-bounty inbox (bugbounty@coderpad.io) and rewards of up to $500 for issues across coderpad.io and the CodinGame domains.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The public Screen changelog, which renders client-side and was read in a real browser, lists dated releases through June 2026, including video questions and AI-generated multiple-choice questions (both March 2026) and video transcripts (June 2026), but has no entries for Qualify, Benchmark AI or model updates.
- AbsenceCaptured Sep 25, 2026
No model-performance, drift or bias-monitoring dashboard, and no customer-notification protocol for AI model changes, was found on coderpad.io, the status page, the security page or either public changelog (the Interview changelog was last updated in August 2024).
Customer Documentation
5 items58
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
A public policies hub links the terms of service, customer agreement, privacy policy, cookie notice, subprocessor list, the CodinGame-only DPA, the vulnerability disclosure policy and the AI policy.
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The docs hub hosts the Screen Score Guide alongside detailed Screen and Interview documentation on scoring, cheating detection, proctoring, anonymization, data protection and AI features.
https://coderpad.io/resources/docs/the-coderpad-screen-score-guide/
- DocumentationCaptured Sep 25, 2026
The Screen cheating-prevention doc explains each detection measure, says suspicious behavior does not always mean cheating, notes that automatic scoring can be overridden by hand, and discloses that the optional AI follow-up question uses a ChatGPT integration to generate and validate the answer.
https://coderpad.io/resources/docs/screen/tests/cheating-prevention-detection/
- Public statementCaptured Sep 25, 2026
Qualify has only a marketing page; the docs hub has no user guide, instructions for use or limitations statement for its AI reviewer.
- AbsenceCaptured Sep 25, 2026
No NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois AI Video Interview Act or Colorado deployer guidance, candidate-notice template or compliance FAQ was found in the docs hub, the policies hub, the FAQ page (coderpad.io/faqs), or the blog and event sitemaps.
Editorial notes
Company overview
CoderPad, Inc. was founded in 2013 and is headquartered in San Francisco. In October 2021 it acquired the French assessment company CodinGame, whose CodinGame for Work product became CoderPad Screen in February 2023. The Montpellier entity, now CoderPad France SA, is named alongside CoderPad, Inc. in the privacy policy and terms, and is the processor in the DPA for EU-hosted Screen accounts. Screen scores coding tests automatically against hidden test cases, shows each candidate's percentile benchmark and rank, and flags unusual activity, with optional AI webcam proctoring. Qualify, a newer product sold as 'the AI reviewer', has applicants record asynchronous video answers, then uses AI to evaluate their responses and applications against the employer's criteria and rank them. Interview hosts live coding sessions with AI Assist, an AI note-taker and AI summaries, and Benchmark AI compares candidates across tests and interviews. Self-serve plans cost $80 to $500 a month, and Enterprise pricing is custom.
Regulatory exposure
Qualify's AI ranking of applicants is the clearest automated employment decision tool in CoderPad's line-up under NYC Local Law 144. It is also a high-risk Annex III point 4 system under the EU AI Act, whose deferred obligations now apply from 2 December 2027. Screen's automatic scores, percentile benchmarks and rankings may also be in scope where employers rely on them. Qualify's AI analyzes recorded video, so employers hiring in Illinois face the AI Video Interview Act on top of the notice duties in HB 3773. Colorado's SB 26-189 and California's FEHA rules on automated-decision systems also reach its customers. CoderPad has published no LL 144 bias audit and no deployer guidance for any of these laws. It has not said which signals Qualify's AI uses, including whether it reads facial or vocal cues, which matters under the Art. 5(1)(f) ban on emotion recognition in the workplace. Its AI policy says AI never makes an automated hiring decision and mentions the EU AI Act only as a compliance aim. Yet a July 2026 CoderPad blog post reminds buyers that LL 144 requires annual third-party bias audits and tells them to check a competitor's compliance documentation before buying.
Path to a higher score
The biggest gain would come from an independent NYC LL 144 bias audit of Qualify's AI ranking, and of Screen's scoring and ranking where customers rely on it, with the summary published every year. CoderPad should also publish Qualify documentation covering which inputs the AI reviewer uses and excludes (transcript only, or visual and vocal signals too), which models it runs on, how rankings are produced and validated, and what human review is expected. Several public documents need to match what Qualify and Benchmark AI actually do. The AI policy's list of purposes leaves out evaluating and ranking candidates. It also says AI features other than proctoring are not designed to process personal data. The privacy policy says no automated decision-making is used, and the subprocessor list names no processor for Qualify's analysis. Further steps are EU AI Act, Illinois AI Video Interview Act and LL 144 deployer guidance with a system description a customer could use for a FRIA; published adverse-impact and validity evidence for the 'fair', 'objective' and 'predictive validity' claims; model-update entries in the public changelog; and postmortems on the status page.
Regulatory frame
What applies to assessment AI.
Assessment is the most-regulated surface in AI hiring. NYC LL 144, EEOC and OFCCP frameworks, Illinois HB 3773, and EU AI Act Annex III §4 all apply, with overlap on bias-audit obligations.
Compare
CoderPad against its nearest-scoring peers.
The closest scores in Assessment AI, side by side.
- Side-by-sideCoderPad vs Talview42F
- Side-by-sideCoderPad vs Coderbyte42F
- Side-by-sideCoderPad vs Talogy42F
- Side-by-sideCoderPad vs Tengai42F
Ranking
Others rated in Assessment AI
Ranked 61 of 82 by weighted total under rubric v1.0. The ordering is arithmetic on the rubric and carries no view on which tool suits a given hiring process.
- #58Tengai42F
- #59Mercer | Mettl42F
- #60Zoho Recruit42F
- #61CoderPadThis profile42F
- #62eSkill41F
- #63Willo41F
Conflicts of interest
No vendor pays for placement, scoring, or removal. Casework - the consulting firm that operates this directory - provides paid services to some vendors. Any active or recent (within 24 months) commercial relationship is disclosed on the affected vendor profile and the review is reassigned to an independent reviewer. See the full policy on About.
Casework has no commercial relationship with this vendor.