§ The result
Glider AI leads Cangrade by 7 points.
Glider AI finishes 7 points ahead of Cangrade under rubric v1.0, 52 to 45, both scored as Assessment entries. Cangrade takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Customer Documentation among them, against 3 for Glider AI, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 2 are level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cangrade 35, Glider AI 68) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 78% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cangrade
Cangrade is a predictive pre-hire assessment and screening platform that scores candidates against customer-specific success models built from roughly 50 psychometric traits, with add-on modules for resume screening, structured and video interviews, interview scheduling, and reference checking.
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
Cangrade 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, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cangrade | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Glider AI 68
5.9 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Glider AI 40
1.0 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Glider AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Glider AI 60
0.2 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Glider AI 55
0.1 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -7.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 68 | -33 | -5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 54 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 52 (F) | -7 | -7.4 |
§ 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 | Cangrade | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 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% | 3 | 2 | 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% | 2 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 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 Cangrade and Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 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