§ The result
4 points separate Cangrade and Willo.
Cangrade (Assessment) edges Willo (Video interview) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 45 to 41. Cangrade leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Willo leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 52, Willo 38 — and at a 20% weight it carries 53% 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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
§ The record
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, Willo under Video interview 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 | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · Willo 38
2.8 weighted points to Cangrade
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · Willo 30
0.9 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · Willo 25
0.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · Willo 62
0.7 weighted points to Willo
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · Willo 54
0.6 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · Willo 36
0.5 weighted points to Willo
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · Willo 53
0.1 weighted points to Cangrade
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus Willo.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 53 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 62 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 36 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 41 (F) | +4 | +4.0 |
§ 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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 10 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 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; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 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 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo 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