§ The result
Oracle Recruiting leads Cegid on 4 of the 7 criteria.
Oracle Recruiting holds a 4-point edge over Cegid under rubric v1.0, 49 to 45, with both scored in the ATS-integrated cohort. Oracle Recruiting leads 4 of the 7 criteria and the remaining 3 are level, so Cegid is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 4 Oracle Recruiting leads is FRIA Support, Cegid 32 to Oracle Recruiting 35. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Cegid 50, Oracle Recruiting 60) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 53% of the weighted advantage Oracle Recruiting holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
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
Oracle Recruiting
Oracle Recruiting (part of Oracle Fusion Cloud HCM, formerly Oracle Recruiting Cloud) is an enterprise applicant tracking system whose embedded AI suggests and ranks candidates, finds similar candidates, and generates 0-5 generative-AI match ratings against job requisitions to assist recruiters.
§ The record
Cegid and Oracle Recruiting are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Cegid | Oracle Recruiting |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Oracle Recruiting 60
2.0 weighted points to Oracle Recruiting
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Oracle Recruiting 60
0.8 weighted points to Oracle Recruiting
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Oracle Recruiting 60
0.6 weighted points to Oracle Recruiting
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Oracle Recruiting 35
0.4 weighted points to Oracle Recruiting
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to -3.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.8 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 -3.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Oracle Recruiting.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Oracle Recruiting | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 49 (F) | -4 | -3.8 |
§ 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 | Oracle Recruiting | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 2 | — |
| 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% | 6 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 4 | 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; Oracle Recruiting has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oracle Recruiting, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oracle Recruiting 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