§ The result
3 points separate Cangrade and Recruitee.
Cangrade (Assessment) edges Recruitee (ATS-integrated) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 45 to 42. Cangrade leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Recruitee leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 52, Recruitee 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 50% 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
Recruitee
Collaborative applicant tracking system, part of the Tellent group, with AI-assisted features for job-description generation, screening candidates against team-defined criteria, resurfacing past applicants, and summarizing evaluation feedback.
§ The record
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, Recruitee 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 | Recruitee |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2014 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Recruitee 42
2.0 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Recruitee 40
1.0 weighted points to Recruitee
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Recruitee 30
0.9 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Recruitee 27
0.4 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Recruitee 58
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Recruitee 52
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Recruitee 58
0.2 weighted points to Recruitee
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Recruitee.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Recruitee | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 42 (F) | +3 | +2.8 |
§ 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 | Cangrade | Recruitee | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 7 | 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; Recruitee has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 7 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 21 for Recruitee, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruitee 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