§ The result
Beamery leads Ceipal on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 26 points between Beamery (Sourcing) and Ceipal (ATS-integrated): 61 (D) for Beamery, 35 (F) for Ceipal. Beamery leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Ceipal leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Beamery 85, Ceipal 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 44% of the weighted advantage Beamery holds across the 7 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
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
§ The record
Beamery is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Ceipal under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144.
| Record | Beamery | Ceipal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Beamery 85 · Ceipal 20
11.7 weighted points to Beamery
20% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Beamery 70 · Ceipal 30
8.0 weighted points to Beamery
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Beamery 60 · Ceipal 38
2.6 weighted points to Beamery
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Beamery 60 · Ceipal 46
2.1 weighted points to Beamery
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Beamery 55 · Ceipal 46
1.1 weighted points to Beamery
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Beamery 30 · Ceipal 25
0.8 weighted points to Beamery
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Beamery 60 · Ceipal 53
0.6 weighted points to Beamery
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +26.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 26.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +26 beside that +26.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Beamery minus Ceipal.
| Category | Weight | Beamery | Ceipal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 30 | +40 | +8.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 85 | 20 | +65 | +11.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 46 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 46 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 60 | 38 | +22 | +2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 53 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 61 (D) | 35 (F) | +26 | +26.8 |
§ 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 | Ceipal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | — | 3 | 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 | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Beamery has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Beamery sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Beamery, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Beamery last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 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