§ The result
Cegid leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Cegid (ATS-integrated) opens a 15-point lead on Moonhub (Sourcing), 45 to 30. Cegid takes all 7 criteria and Moonhub none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Cegid 32 to Moonhub 25. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (Cegid 62, Moonhub 38) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cegid 50, Moonhub 30), the second being 28% of the weighted advantage Cegid holds across the 7 criteria 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
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing 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.
| Record | Cegid | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Moonhub 30
4.0 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Moonhub 40
2.3 weighted points to Cegid
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Moonhub 18
2.2 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Moonhub 22
2.2 weighted points to Cegid
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Moonhub 38
1.9 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Moonhub 25
1.1 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Moonhub 48
0.8 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.4 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 +14.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 30 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 18 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 22 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 38 | +24 | +1.9 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 30 (F) | +15 | +14.4 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Cegid | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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