§ The result
Beamery leads Cangrade by 16 points.
Beamery finishes 16 points clear of Cangrade under rubric v1.0 — 61 (D) against 45 (F) — across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Beamery leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Cangrade leads 2, including Customer Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Beamery 85, Cangrade 35 — and at an 18% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage Beamery holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Beamery
Talent CRM and sourcing platform that maintains a long-lived candidate pipeline, with AI-driven matching and skills inference.
Vendor profile
Cangrade
Cangrade is a predictive pre-hire assessment and screening platform that scores candidates against customer-specific success models built from roughly 50 psychometric traits, with add-on modules for resume screening, structured and video interviews, interview scheduling, and reference checking.
§ The record
Beamery is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Cangrade 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 Cangrade is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Beamery | Cangrade |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Beamery 85 · Cangrade 35
9.0 weighted points to Beamery
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Beamery 70 · Cangrade 52
3.6 weighted points to Beamery
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Beamery 60 · Cangrade 32
3.4 weighted points to Beamery
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Beamery 60 · Cangrade 54
0.9 weighted points to Beamery
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Beamery 60 · Cangrade 62
0.2 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Beamery 55 · Cangrade 56
0.1 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +16.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +16.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Beamery minus Cangrade.
| Category | Weight | Beamery | Cangrade | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 52 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 85 | 35 | +50 | +9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 32 | +28 | +3.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 45 (F) | +16 | +16.6 |
§ 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 | Beamery | Cangrade | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 3 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 10 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Beamery has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Beamery and Cangrade sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Beamery, across 2 distinct source domains, and 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Beamery last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cangrade 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