§ The result
Cangrade leads Mercor on all 7 criteria.
Cangrade finishes 22 points clear of Mercor under rubric v1.0 — 45 against 23 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Cangrade leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Mercor leads none. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (Cangrade 54, Mercor 22) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cangrade 52, Mercor 22), the second being 28% of the weighted advantage Cangrade holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Mercor
Mercor is an AI talent platform that runs automated 20-minute AI video interviews and semantic resume/profile matching to vet, score, and place candidates and expert contractors, and offers an enterprise applicant-screening product that scores employers' applicant pools against role rubrics with pass/fail recommendations.
§ The record
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, Mercor under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: 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 | Mercor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2023 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Mercor 22
6.0 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Mercor 22
4.8 weighted points to Cangrade
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Mercor 10
4.5 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Mercor 40
1.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Mercor 42
1.7 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Mercor 20
1.5 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Mercor 20
1.4 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +21.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 21.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +22 beside that +21.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Mercor.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Mercor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 22 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 10 | +25 | +4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 22 | +32 | +4.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 42 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 20 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 23 (F) | +22 | +21.7 |
§ 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 | Mercor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 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% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 documented absences; Mercor has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cangrade sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Mercor, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercor 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