§ The result
PageUp leads Cangrade on all 7 criteria.
PageUp finishes 19 points clear of Cangrade under rubric v1.0 — 64 (D) against 45 (F) — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. PageUp leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Cangrade leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cangrade 35, PageUp 80) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 42% of the weighted advantage PageUp holds across the 7 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
PageUp
PageUp is an enterprise talent acquisition suite (ATS, recruitment marketing/CRM, onboarding, learning and performance). Its AI Skills Matching sorts each applicant's resume against skills taken from the job ad into five bands, from Excellent Match to Not a Match, and recruiters reach those results through Paige, its conversational assistant.
§ The record
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, PageUp under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Cangrade is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cangrade | PageUp |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2014 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · PageUp 80
8.1 weighted points to PageUp
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · PageUp 74
4.4 weighted points to PageUp
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · PageUp 55
2.8 weighted points to PageUp
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · PageUp 40
1.5 weighted points to PageUp
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · PageUp 63
1.3 weighted points to PageUp
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · PageUp 64
1.0 weighted points to PageUp
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · PageUp 63
0.1 weighted points to PageUp
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -19.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -19.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus PageUp.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | PageUp | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 74 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 80 | -45 | -8.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 63 | -9 | -1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 64 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 55 | -23 | -2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 63 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 64 (D) | -19 | -19.1 |
§ 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 | Cangrade | PageUp | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 24 | 4 | 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; PageUp has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cangrade and PageUp sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 28 for PageUp, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- PageUp 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