§ The result
Cegid leads Pin by 5 points.
Cegid scores 45 and Pin 40 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Cegid: Cegid is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Pin on Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Cegid 50, Pin 30) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 64% of the weighted advantage Cegid holds across the 5 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
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
§ The record
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Pin under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Scheduling.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Cegid | Pin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 2024 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Pin 30
4.0 weighted points to Cegid
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Pin 35
0.9 weighted points to Pin
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Pin 50
0.8 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Pin 50
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Pin 45
0.6 weighted points to Pin
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Pin 55
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Pin 30
0.3 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Pin.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Pin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 30 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 40 (F) | +5 | +4.7 |
§ 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 | Pin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 32 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 76 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pin 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.
§ Where next