§ The result
Brainner leads Pillar on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Brainner finishes 6 points ahead of Pillar under rubric v1.0, 46 to 40, both scored as Screening entries. Brainner leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Pillar is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Brainner leads is Human Oversight Design, Brainner 50 to Pillar 48. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Brainner 45, Pillar 33) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Brainner 52, Pillar 42), 32% 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
Pillar
Pillar (now "AI Interview Companion by Employ") is an interview intelligence platform that records and transcribes job interviews, generates AI interview guides and highlight clips, and surfaces candidate insights and interviewer-coaching recommendations.
§ The record
Brainner and Pillar are both filed under Screening 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. Only Pillar is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Brainner | Pillar |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2023 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · Pillar 42
2.0 weighted points to Brainner
12% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brainner 45 · Pillar 33
1.4 weighted points to Brainner
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brainner 53 · Pillar 45
1.2 weighted points to Brainner
18% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brainner 42 · Pillar 38
0.7 weighted points to Brainner
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · Pillar 50
0.6 weighted points to Brainner
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brainner 50 · Pillar 48
0.2 weighted points to Brainner
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 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 Pillar.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | Pillar | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 45 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 33 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +0.6 |
| 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 | Pillar | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 12 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Brainner has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Pillar has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 7 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 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Pillar, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pillar 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