HomeCompareCegid vs UKG

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cegid vs UKG

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

1 point separates Cegid and UKG.

Under rubric v1.0, Cegid and UKG finish 1 point apart, 45 to 44, as two ATS-integrated entries. UKG takes 2 of the 7 criteria, FRIA Support among them, against 4 for Cegid, whose share includes Customer Documentation, and 1 is level. The advantage Cegid holds is spread out: Customer Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cegid 62, UKG 55, 8% weight), yet it supplies only 36% of the weighted points Cegid gains across the 4 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Cegid and UKG are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.

RecordCegidUKG
Price tierEnterpriseEnterprise
HeadquartersFRUS
Founded19832020

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 8% weight · 26% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cegid 62 · UKG 55

    0.6 weighted points to Cegid

  2. 15% weight · 47% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cegid 32 · UKG 35

    0.4 weighted points to UKG

  3. 20% weight · 65% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cegid 50 · UKG 48

    0.4 weighted points to Cegid

  4. 12% weight · 82% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Cegid 55 · UKG 52

    0.4 weighted points to Cegid

  5. 12% weight · 93% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Cegid 40 · UKG 38

    0.2 weighted points to Cegid

  6. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cegid 55 · UKG 56

    0.1 weighted points to UKG

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.0.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cegid minus UKG.

CategoryWeightCegidUKGΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5048+2+0.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%3030--
FRIA Support15%3235-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5556-1-0.1
Human Oversight Design12%5552+3+0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%4038+2+0.2
Customer Documentation8%6255+7+0.6
Total100%45 (F)44 (F)+1+1.0

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCegidUKG
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%61Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31—02—
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain02—
Post-Market Monitoring12%51Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%51Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%336Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain68Audit 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; UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Cegid last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
UKG 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.