§ The result
Teamtailor leads Canditech on all 7 criteria.
Teamtailor scores 47 and Canditech 39 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Teamtailor is ahead of Canditech on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at Canditech 53 to Teamtailor 54. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Canditech 37, Teamtailor 50, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Canditech is filed under Assessment AI, Teamtailor 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 | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IL | SE |
| Founded | 2019 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Canditech 37 · Teamtailor 50
2.6 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Canditech 30 · Teamtailor 42
1.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Canditech 32 · Teamtailor 42
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Canditech 25 · Teamtailor 30
0.9 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Canditech 52 · Teamtailor 58
0.9 weighted points to Teamtailor
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Canditech 58 · Teamtailor 62
0.3 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Canditech 53 · Teamtailor 54
0.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Canditech minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Canditech | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 37 | 50 | -13 | -2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 54 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 47 (F) | -8 | -7.8 |
§ 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 | Canditech | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Canditech has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Canditech last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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