§ The result
Glider AI leads Canditech on all 7 criteria.
Glider AI sits 13 points above Canditech under rubric v1.0, 52 against 39, with both filed under Assessment. Glider AI leads every one of the 7 criteria, Canditech none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Canditech 52 to Glider AI 54. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Canditech 25, Glider AI 68) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 59% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Canditech
Canditech is a skills-assessment and job-simulation platform that screens candidates with work-sample tests, technical and soft-skill assessments, and one-way video interviews, using AI agents to auto-score open-text and video responses.
Vendor profile
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
§ The record
Canditech and Glider AI are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Canditech | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IL | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Canditech 25 · Glider AI 68
7.7 weighted points to Glider AI
20% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Canditech 37 · Glider AI 52
3.0 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Canditech 32 · Glider AI 40
1.0 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Canditech 30 · Glider AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Canditech 52 · Glider AI 54
0.3 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Canditech 53 · Glider AI 55
0.2 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Canditech 58 · Glider AI 60
0.2 weighted points to Glider AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -13.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Canditech minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | Canditech | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 37 | 52 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 68 | -43 | -7.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 55 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 52 (F) | -13 | -13.1 |
§ 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 | Canditech | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 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% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Canditech has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Canditech last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Glider AI 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