§ The result
3 points separate Cangrade and Talogy.
Within the Assessment cohort, Cangrade edges Talogy by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 45 to 42. Cangrade leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Talogy leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Cangrade 35, Talogy 30, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 33% 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
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Cangrade and Talogy are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cangrade | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Talogy 30
0.9 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Talogy 25
0.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Talogy 52
0.5 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Talogy 58
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Talogy 52
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Talogy 53
0.2 weighted points to Talogy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.9 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 +2.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 53 | -1 | -0.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 42 (F) | +3 | +2.5 |
§ 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 | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 3 | — | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 22 | 9 | 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; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy 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