§ The result
3 points separate Cegid and Talview.
Cegid holds a 3-point edge over Talview under rubric v1.0, 45 to 42, across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 1 in favour of Cegid, with 2 level: Cegid is ahead on FRIA Support and Talview on Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Talview takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Cegid 30 to Talview 38, 100% of the weighted advantage Talview holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Customer Documentation, Cegid 62 to Talview 52.
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
Talview
AI-powered hiring and exam-integrity platform spanning video interviewing, skills assessments, identity verification, and AI proctoring.
§ The record
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Talview under Video interview 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 Talview is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cegid | Talview |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Talview 38
1.4 weighted points to Talview
15% weight · 47% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Talview 25
1.1 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Talview 48
1.1 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Talview 32
1.0 weighted points to Cegid
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Talview 52
0.8 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +2.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Talview.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Talview | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 32 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 42 (F) | +3 | +2.4 |
§ 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 | Talview | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 6 | 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; Talview has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Talview, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talview 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