§ The result
Darwinbox leads Ceipal by 11 points.
Darwinbox sits 11 points above Ceipal under rubric v1.0, 46 against 35, with both filed under ATS-integrated. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Darwinbox: Darwinbox is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Ceipal on Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ceipal 30, Darwinbox 60 — and at a 20% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage Darwinbox holds across the 6 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
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
§ The record
Ceipal and Darwinbox 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 Darwinbox is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ceipal | Darwinbox |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Darwinbox 60
6.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Darwinbox 58
1.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
18% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Darwinbox 28
1.4 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Darwinbox 55
1.1 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Darwinbox 30
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Darwinbox 35
0.4 weighted points to Ceipal
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Darwinbox 57
0.3 weighted points to Darwinbox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Darwinbox.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Darwinbox | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 60 | -30 | -6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 28 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 58 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 57 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 46 (F) | -11 | -11.0 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Ceipal | Darwinbox | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Darwinbox 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