§ The result
Paycom leads Ceipal on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Paycom finishes 15 points clear of Ceipal inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 50 against 35. Paycom leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Ceipal is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Paycom leads is FRIA Support, Ceipal 25 to Paycom 30. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ceipal 30, Paycom 68 — and at a 20% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage Paycom 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
Paycom
Paycom is a single-database human capital management and payroll platform whose applicant tracking system automates recruiting with resume parsing, keyword/knockout candidate filtering, automated correspondence, generative job-description writing, and a command-driven AI data-query engine (IWant).
§ The record
Ceipal and Paycom are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Paycom is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ceipal | Paycom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1998 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Paycom 68
7.6 weighted points to Paycom
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Paycom 38
3.2 weighted points to Paycom
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Paycom 62
2.4 weighted points to Paycom
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Paycom 55
1.1 weighted points to Paycom
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Paycom 30
0.8 weighted points to Paycom
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Paycom 60
0.6 weighted points to Paycom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -15.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -15.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Paycom.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Paycom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 68 | -38 | -7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 38 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 62 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 55 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 38 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 60 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 50 (F) | -15 | -15.6 |
§ 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 | Paycom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Paycom has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
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 Paycom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paycom 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