§ The result
Cangrade leads XOR by 15 points.
Cangrade finishes 15 points clear of XOR under rubric v1.0 — 45 against 30 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Cangrade leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while XOR leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cangrade 52, XOR 20 — and at a 20% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Cangrade holds across the 6 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
XOR
XOR is a text-first conversational-AI recruiting platform that pre-screens and scores high-volume and hourly candidates with recruiter-defined knockout/scoring questions over SMS, WhatsApp, and Messenger, then auto-schedules interviews on the recruiter's calendar.
§ The record
Cangrade is filed under Assessment AI, XOR under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Scheduling.
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 | XOR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cangrade 52 · XOR 20
6.4 weighted points to Cangrade
18% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cangrade 35 · XOR 18
3.1 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cangrade 56 · XOR 40
1.9 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cangrade 54 · XOR 42
1.8 weighted points to Cangrade
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cangrade 62 · XOR 48
1.1 weighted points to Cangrade
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cangrade 30 · XOR 25
0.8 weighted points to Cangrade
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cangrade 32 · XOR 33
0.1 weighted points to XOR
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +14.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cangrade minus XOR.
| Category | Weight | Cangrade | XOR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 20 | +32 | +6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 18 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 42 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 40 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 30 (F) | +15 | +14.9 |
§ 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 | XOR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 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 | 11 | 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; XOR has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 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 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for Cangrade, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for XOR, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cangrade last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- XOR 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