§ The result
HighMatch leads Ceipal on all 7 criteria.
HighMatch scores 43 and Ceipal 35 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. HighMatch is ahead of Ceipal on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Post-Market Monitoring at Ceipal 38 to HighMatch 40. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ceipal 30, HighMatch 45, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage HighMatch 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
HighMatch
HighMatch sells pre-employment assessments built by I-O psychologists (personality, cognitive, skills, situational judgment, culture fit and minimum-qualification screens), including the Berke Assessment for small businesses, that score candidates against weighted, role-specific hiring profiles and return job-fit scores, trait reports and tailored interview guides.
§ The record
Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HighMatch under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only HighMatch is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ceipal | HighMatch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · HighMatch 45
3.0 weighted points to HighMatch
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · HighMatch 30
1.8 weighted points to HighMatch
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · HighMatch 60
1.7 weighted points to HighMatch
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · HighMatch 52
0.9 weighted points to HighMatch
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · HighMatch 30
0.8 weighted points to HighMatch
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · HighMatch 58
0.4 weighted points to HighMatch
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · HighMatch 40
0.2 weighted points to HighMatch
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus HighMatch.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | HighMatch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 45 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 52 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 60 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 58 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 43 (F) | -8 | -8.8 |
§ 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 | HighMatch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 31 | 4 | 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; HighMatch has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HighMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 35 for HighMatch, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HighMatch 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