§ The result
Cangrade leads TestDome on all 7 criteria.
Cangrade finishes 8 points ahead of TestDome under rubric v1.0, 45 to 37, both scored as Assessment entries. Of the 7 criteria TestDome wins none, and the narrowest lead Cangrade holds is on FRIA Support, Cangrade 30 to TestDome 28. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 35, TestDome 15 — and at an 18% weight it carries 46% 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
TestDome
TestDome sells pay-per-candidate online skills tests for coding, Excel and more than 100 other skills. The tests are scored automatically, and open-ended answers can be scored by AI. AI analysis of webcam and screen proctoring recordings flags possible cheating, and a live code-interview tool is included.
§ The record
Cangrade and TestDome 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 | TestDome |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | HR |
| Founded | 2014 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · TestDome 15
3.6 weighted points to Cangrade
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · TestDome 40
2.4 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · TestDome 50
0.6 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · TestDome 52
0.5 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · TestDome 28
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · TestDome 30
0.2 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · TestDome 60
0.2 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus TestDome.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | TestDome | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 15 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 50 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 37 (F) | +8 | +7.8 |
§ 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 | TestDome | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 27 | 5 | 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; TestDome has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 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 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for TestDome, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TestDome 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