HomeCompareCegid vs Glider AI

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cegid vs Glider AI

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Glider AI leads Cegid by 7 points.

Under rubric v1.0, Glider AI, filed under Assessment, finishes on 52 and Cegid, filed under ATS-integrated, on 45, 7 points apart. Cegid takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Customer Documentation among them, against 3 for Glider AI, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cegid 30, Glider AI 68 — and at an 18% weight it carries 89% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Glider AI 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 Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCegidGlider AI
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersFRUS
Founded19832020

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 86% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Cegid 30 · Glider AI 68

    6.8 weighted points to Glider AI

  2. 15% weight · 91% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cegid 32 · Glider AI 35

    0.4 weighted points to Glider AI

  3. 20% weight · 96% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cegid 50 · Glider AI 52

    0.4 weighted points to Glider AI

  4. 8% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cegid 62 · Glider AI 60

    0.2 weighted points to Cegid

  5. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cegid 55 · Glider AI 54

    0.1 weighted points to Cegid

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -7.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.4.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cegid minus Glider AI.

CategoryWeightCegidGlider AIΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5052-2-0.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%3068-38-6.8
FRIA Support15%3235-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5554+1+0.1
Human Oversight Design12%5555--
Post-Market Monitoring12%4040--
Customer Documentation8%6260+2+0.2
Total100%45 (F)52 (F)-7-7.4

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCegidGlider AI
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%61Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31—31Audit reportSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%51Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%51Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%336Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain276Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 72 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Cegid last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Glider AI 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.