§ The result
1 point separates isolved and Brainner.
isolved (ATS-integrated) edges Brainner (Screening) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46. The 7 criteria split 3 to 2 in favour of isolved, with 2 level: isolved is ahead on Human Oversight Design and Brainner on Article 11 Technical Documentation. One criterion, Human Oversight Design, is both the widest raw gap (Brainner 50, isolved 55) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 12% weight it makes up 43% of the weighted advantage isolved holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Brainner
Brainner is an AI screening layer for applicant tracking systems that scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted criteria with per-criterion justifications, and flags suspected fake applicants using third-party identity and fraud data.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
§ The record
Brainner is filed under Screening AI, isolved under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Brainner | isolved |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2023 | 1986 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brainner 50 · isolved 55
0.6 weighted points to isolved
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brainner 42 · isolved 45
0.5 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · isolved 50
0.4 weighted points to Brainner
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brainner 45 · isolved 47
0.2 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · isolved 56
0.2 weighted points to Brainner
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -0.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 1.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brainner minus isolved.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | isolved | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 53 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 47 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 47 (F) | -1 | -0.8 |
§ 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 | Brainner | isolved | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Brainner has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Brainner and isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- isolved 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