§ The result
AmazingHiring leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, AmazingHiring, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 37 and Cognisess, filed under Assessment, on 30, 7 points apart. AmazingHiring takes all 7 criteria from Cognisess without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Post-Market Monitoring, AmazingHiring 33 to Cognisess 32. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (AmazingHiring 52, Cognisess 40) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (AmazingHiring 35, Cognisess 25), the second being 29% of the weighted advantage AmazingHiring holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
AmazingHiring
A technical-talent sourcing platform that aggregates public developer profiles from 50+ networks (GitHub, Stack Overflow, Kaggle, LinkedIn) and uses AI to rank and surface candidates for recruiters, with verified-contact retrieval and outreach automation.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Cognisess under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Cognisess is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Cognisess |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2011 | 2011 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Cognisess 25
2.0 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 51% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Cognisess 20
1.5 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Cognisess 42
1.2 weighted points to AmazingHiring
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Cognisess 40
1.0 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Cognisess 42
0.7 weighted points to AmazingHiring
18% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Cognisess 20
0.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Cognisess 32
0.1 weighted points to AmazingHiring
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Cognisess.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Cognisess | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 32 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 30 (F) | +7 | +6.9 |
§ 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 | AmazingHiring | Cognisess | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 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