§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Ceipal on all 7 criteria.
Cornerstone OnDemand finishes 21 points clear of Ceipal inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 56 against 35. Cornerstone OnDemand leads every one of the 7 criteria, Ceipal none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Ceipal 38 to Cornerstone OnDemand 45. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ceipal 30, Cornerstone OnDemand 72, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 39% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ceipal
AI-powered applicant tracking and workforce-management platform for staffing firms that sources, matches, and ranks candidates on a 1-to-100 scale against job requirements.
Vendor profile
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
§ The record
Ceipal and Cornerstone OnDemand are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Cornerstone OnDemand is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ceipal | Cornerstone OnDemand |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1999 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Cornerstone OnDemand 72
8.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Cornerstone OnDemand 58
6.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60
2.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Cornerstone OnDemand 35
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Cornerstone OnDemand 55
1.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Cornerstone OnDemand 45
0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60
0.6 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -21.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 21.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -21 beside that -21.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Cornerstone OnDemand.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Cornerstone OnDemand | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 72 | -42 | -8.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 58 | -38 | -6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 60 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 45 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 60 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 56 (F) | -21 | -21.3 |
§ 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 | Ceipal | Cornerstone OnDemand | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cornerstone OnDemand 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