§ The result
Plum takes the total, Cegid takes more of the criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Plum, filed under Assessment, finishes on 54 and Cegid, filed under ATS-integrated, on 45, 9 points apart. Cegid leads more of the criteria, 4 against 3 for Plum, yet Plum takes Bias Audit Transparency, which carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cegid 30, Plum 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 85% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 3 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
Plum
Plum is a pre-employment talent assessment platform that uses a Five-Factor (Big Five) psychometric Discovery Survey and a Talent Match model to score and rank candidates on behavioral "durable skills" for role fit, hiring, and development.
§ The record
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Plum 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 Plum is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cegid | Plum |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | CA |
| Founded | 1983 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Plum 83
9.5 weighted points to Plum
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Plum 58
1.6 weighted points to Plum
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Plum 28
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Plum 36
0.5 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Plum 52
0.4 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Plum 54
0.1 weighted points to Cegid
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Plum 63
0.1 weighted points to Plum
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -9.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Plum.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Plum | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 83 | -53 | -9.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 36 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 63 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 54 (F) | -9 | -9.6 |
§ 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 | Plum | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 15 | 4 | 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; Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Plum 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