§ The result
Hogan Assessments leads Ceipal on all 7 criteria.
Hogan Assessments sits 12 points above Ceipal under rubric v1.0 — 47 against 35 — with Hogan Assessments filed under Assessment and Ceipal under ATS-integrated. Hogan Assessments leads every one of the 7 criteria, Ceipal none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Ceipal 38 to Hogan Assessments 40. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ceipal 20, Hogan Assessments 44, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Hogan Assessments 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
Hogan Assessments
Hogan Assessments provides science-based personality assessments - chiefly the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) - used to predict workplace performance for employee selection and development.
§ The record
Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Hogan Assessments 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 Hogan Assessments is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ceipal | Hogan Assessments |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1987 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Hogan Assessments 44
4.3 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Hogan Assessments 50
4.0 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Hogan Assessments 36
1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Hogan Assessments 52
0.9 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Hogan Assessments 52
0.7 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Hogan Assessments 62
0.7 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Hogan Assessments 40
0.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Hogan Assessments.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Hogan Assessments | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 50 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 44 | -24 | -4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 36 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 52 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 52 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 62 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 47 (F) | -12 | -12.6 |
§ 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 | Hogan Assessments | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 20 | 6 | 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; Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Hogan Assessments last reviewed
- July 17, 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