§ The result
Vervoe takes the total, Cangrade takes more of the criteria.
Within the Assessment cohort, Vervoe edges Cangrade by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 46 to 45. Cangrade leads more of the criteria than Vervoe — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Vervoe leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Vervoe. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 35, Vervoe 52 — and at an 18% weight it carries 83% of the weighted advantage Vervoe holds across the 3 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
Vervoe
AI-powered skills-assessment platform that grades and ranks candidates on performance in role-specific, task-based assessments.
§ The record
Cangrade and Vervoe 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 | Vervoe |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2014 | 2016 |
§ 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 · Vervoe 52
3.1 weighted points to Vervoe
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Vervoe 45
1.4 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Vervoe 25
0.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Vervoe 60
0.5 weighted points to Vervoe
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Vervoe 28
0.5 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Vervoe 58
0.3 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Vervoe 55
0.1 weighted points to Vervoe
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Vervoe.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Vervoe | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 52 | -17 | -3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 46 (F) | -1 | -0.7 |
§ 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 | Vervoe | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Cangrade has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 10 documented absences; Vervoe has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Vervoe, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Vervoe last reviewed
- June 7, 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