Technical assessment for engineering hiring
Primary sources checkedCodility
Coding assessment and live technical interview platform, priced on invite credits per year and the number of people who may run assessments.
The short answer
- Best for
- Engineering hiring with steady, predictable test volume
- Not ideal for
- Irregular or low-volume hiring — twenty tests a year works out at USD 60 each
- Price
- From USD 1,200 per year, annual billing only
- Closest alternative
- HackerRankSame job, priced per seat with a published entry plan, so the choice is monthly seats against yearly credits
At a glance
- Recruitment fitStrong
- Ease of useUnknown
- ImplementationWeak
- Price transparencyStrong
- Value for moneyFair
- ScalabilityWeak
Why these assessments
- Recruitment fitStrong
- Purpose-built for hiring engineers: screening assessments, live technical interviews and integrity signals in one product.
- Ease of useUnknown
- We have not used it, and we have no independent evidence of how candidates experience the integrity checks.
- ImplementationWeak
- Annual billing only on the entry plan, and we found no evidence of a free trial or pilot to test with first.
- Price transparencyStrong
- Published prices in a category that mostly hides them, including what an invite credit buys, though the price of extra credits is not there.
- Value for moneyFair
- Sound if you fill the credits; the entry plan's smaller task library and single platform user make thin usage expensive.
- ScalabilityWeak
- Platform users are capped low, and Scale sells 300 invites a year while limiting you to 25 a month.
Our reading of the evidence on this page. No score, no formula.
Where it sits
- Apply
- Screen
- Interview
- Decision
The SourcrLab bottom line
Priced on volume you commit to upfront rather than seats, which is honest but demands a forecast most teams do not have. Two details decide the fit. The Scale plan sells 300 invites a year but throttles you to 25 a month, so a hiring spike cannot use the budget you already bought. And the 2026 product openly assesses candidates working with AI tools, with reviewable AI activity per assessment, which is a position on the hardest current question in technical hiring rather than a way around it.
Best fit
Teams hiring engineers continuously enough to plan a year of assessments, who want a task library maintained by someone else and integrity signals they did not have to build.
Think twice if
Irregular or low-volume hiring. The entry plan is USD 1,200 a year for one platform user and up to 120 invites, so a team that tests twenty candidates a year is paying USD 60 a test.
SourcrLab assessment
Everything on this page comes from the vendor's own pages, checked on the dates below. SourcrLab has not used this product in real recruitment work, so you will not find a first-hand opinion here.
Why choose Codility?
It takes a position on candidates using AI
Pre-built AI-skill tasks and an agentic AI Copilot with reviewable activity per assessment, and the Custom plan lists Claude Code CLI. Instead of pretending candidates will not use AI, the assessment records how they used it. That is the question every engineering team is currently arguing about.
Published prices in a category that hides them
USD 1,200 and USD 6,000 a year, on the page, with what each includes. Most assessment vendors in this catalogue send you to a sales call to learn anything at all.
Integrity signals are part of the product
Plagiarism detection, task leakage protection where leaked tasks are removed from the library, and proctoring with candidate snapshots, all from the entry plan. A test whose answers circulate is worse than no test.
Credits work across screening and interviews
The same invite credits can be spent in Screen or in Interview, so a team is not forced to guess the split between automated tests and live technical conversations a year in advance.
Main trade-offs
Scale sells 300 invites and lets you use 25 a month
The annual allowance and the monthly throttle are different numbers, and the throttle is the one that binds during a hiring spike. Twenty-five invites in the month you open four roles is the constraint to plan around.
Platform users are capped low
One platform user on Starter, three on Scale. In a team where recruiters send the tests and engineers review them, three logins is a real constraint, and unlimited users with role-based access only arrives on the Custom plan.
Starter is annual-only, with a smaller library
USD 1,200 billed annually with no monthly option, and a limited task library. The bigger library spanning engineering, AI and system design, and building custom tasks from your own codebase, start on Scale at five times the price.
A coding test measures one thing
This assesses engineering work, not fit, motivation or how someone behaves in a team. Our previous record claimed resume screening and cultural fit assessment among its use cases; neither is what this product does, and treating a score as a hiring decision is how assessment tools produce confident mistakes.
Proctoring is surveillance, and candidates notice
Candidate snapshots and integrity signals help you trust a result and cost you something in candidate experience. In a market where engineers choose between employers, that trade is a decision, not a setting.
Pricing and buying reality
From USD 1,200 per year
- Starter: USD 1,200, annual billing only, up to 120 invite credits per year usable in Screen or Interview, 1 platform user, limited task library
- Scale: USD 6,000, up to 300 invite credits per year with a limit of 25 per month, 3 platform users, larger library including AI and system design, custom tasks built from your own codebase
- Custom: quoted, full platform across Screen, Interview and Skills Intelligence, both task libraries, unlimited platform users with role-based access
- Scale offers monthly or yearly billing, with yearly advertised as 17 percent cheaper
- All plans include plagiarism detection, task leakage protection and proctoring with candidate snapshots
What we do not know
- Whether unused invite credits carry over to the next year
- The price of extra invites once a plan's allowance runs out
- Whether a free trial or pilot exists, since the page mentions none
- Which ATS integrations are available on which plan
- Where candidate assessment data is processed
Checked on the vendor's pricing page, August 2026. Codility pricing page, read in a browser
How it fits your stack
Works with
- Your own codebase, for building custom tasks from the Scale plan
- An IDE through MCP, for task creation
Likely replaces
- Take-home exercises that an engineer has to write and mark by hand
- A whiteboard round that measures nerves as much as skill
May overlap with
- HackerRank on the same job, at a per-seat rather than per-invite price
- TestGorilla, which is broader and shallower across non-engineering roles
Check before buying
- Your assessments per month, against the 25-a-month throttle on Scale
- How many people need to log in, since Starter allows one
- What you will do with an AI-assisted result before you send the first test
- Your cost per test at your real volume, not at the plan's ceiling
Codility vs alternatives
Products a buyer would genuinely put next to this one, with the reason you would pick each instead.
Compare HackerRank directly: same job, priced per seat with a published entry plan, so which is cheaper depends entirely on your test volume.
Consider TestGorilla when you also test non-engineering roles and want breadth rather than depth in code.
Codility head to head
Pairs SourcrLab has looked at as a single buying decision, with the trade-offs written out.
Used Codility?
Tell other recruiters what worked, what did not, and who it suits. Positive, mixed or critical — all useful.
Evidence
- Starter USD 1,200 a year, annual billing only — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- Scale USD 6,000, yearly advertised as 17 percent cheaper than monthly — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- Invite credits: 120 a year on Starter, 300 a year capped at 25 a month on Scale — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- Platform users: 1 on Starter, 3 on Scale, unlimited on Custom — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- AI-skill tasks and an agentic AI Copilot with reviewable activity per assessment — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- Plagiarism detection, task leakage protection and proctoring on every plan — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- Claude Code CLI listed on the Custom plan — checked against a primary source: Codility pricing page, read in a browser
- Whether unused credits carry over, and the price of extras — not enough evidence
- ATS integrations per plan — not enough evidence
- Existence of a free trial or pilot — not enough evidence
- Processing location for assessment data — not enough evidence
Last reviewed: August 2026. How SourcrLab verifies information
Work at Codility?
Email us to verify this profile or suggest a factual update.