§ The result
Brainner leads Oleeo by 6 points.
Brainner scores 46 and Oleeo 40 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. Oleeo takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Brainner, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Brainner 45, Oleeo 30) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Brainner 52, Oleeo 40), 36% of the weighted advantage Brainner builds across the 6 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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
Brainner is filed under Screening AI, Oleeo 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 | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2023 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · Oleeo 40
2.4 weighted points to Brainner
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brainner 45 · Oleeo 30
1.8 weighted points to Brainner
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brainner 53 · Oleeo 45
1.2 weighted points to Brainner
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Brainner 30 · Oleeo 25
0.8 weighted points to Brainner
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brainner 50 · Oleeo 55
0.6 weighted points to Oleeo
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brainner 42 · Oleeo 40
0.4 weighted points to Brainner
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · Oleeo 55
0.2 weighted points to Brainner
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brainner minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 45 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 40 (F) | +6 | +6.2 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Brainner has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Brainner sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo last reviewed
- June 7, 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