§ The result
Cangrade leads Personio by 5 points.
Cangrade scores 45 and Personio 40 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Cangrade leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Personio leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (Cangrade 32, Personio 48) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cangrade 52, Personio 40), the second being 37% of the weighted advantage Cangrade holds across the 5 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
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, Personio 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 | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2014 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Personio 40
2.4 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Personio 48
1.9 weighted points to Personio
18% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Personio 25
1.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Personio 48
1.0 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Personio 50
1.0 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Personio 52
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +4.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 48 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 48 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 40 (F) | +5 | +4.5 |
§ 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 | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 13 | 8 | Sources 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; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cangrade and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 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