§ The result
1 point separates Cegid and Equalture.
Cegid holds a 1-point edge over Equalture under rubric v1.0, 45 to 44, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Equalture takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Cegid, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Equalture — Cegid 30, Equalture 40, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage Equalture holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cegid
Cegid's HR suite offers two recruiting lines: Cegid HR Talent Acquisition (ex-DigitalRecruiters), an ATS/CRM with CV parsing, scorecards, automated scoring and an AI conversational agent that pre-qualifies candidates on career sites and WhatsApp, and Cegid Talentsoft (now sold as Cegid HR Suite) recruiting, whose 'Recruiting Match' matches positions to candidates algorithmically.
Vendor profile
Equalture
Equalture is a game-based pre-employment assessment platform whose short browser games measure candidates' cognitive abilities and behavioural tendencies and convert them into a Fit Score ranked against an employer-specific "Success Profile" derived from that employer's own top performers.
§ The record
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Equalture under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Equalture is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cegid | Equalture |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | FR | NL |
| Founded | 1983 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Equalture 40
1.8 weighted points to Equalture
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Equalture 45
1.0 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Equalture 50
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Equalture 30
0.3 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Equalture 38
0.2 weighted points to Cegid
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Equalture 60
0.2 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +0.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.1 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 +0.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Equalture.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Equalture | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 38 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 44 (F) | +1 | +0.5 |
§ 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 | Cegid | Equalture | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Equalture has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 26 for Equalture, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Equalture 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