§ The result
Greenhouse leads Canditech on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 28 points between Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Canditech (Assessment): 67 (D) for Greenhouse, 39 (F) for Canditech. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Canditech leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Canditech 25, Greenhouse 86, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 39% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
§ The record
Canditech is filed under Assessment AI, Greenhouse under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Canditech is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Canditech | Greenhouse |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IL | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Canditech 25 · Greenhouse 86
11.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Canditech 37 · Greenhouse 78
8.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Canditech 32 · Greenhouse 58
3.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Canditech 30 · Greenhouse 42
1.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Canditech 52 · Greenhouse 64
1.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Canditech 53 · Greenhouse 66
1.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Canditech 58 · Greenhouse 64
0.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -27.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 27.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -28 beside that -27.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Canditech minus Greenhouse.
| Category | Weight | Canditech | Greenhouse | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 37 | 78 | -41 | -8.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 86 | -61 | -11.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 64 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 66 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 58 | -26 | -3.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 67 (D) | -28 | -27.9 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 1 | 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; Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Canditech last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Greenhouse 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