§ The result
Personio leads Ceipal by 5 points.
Personio scores 40 and Ceipal 35 under rubric v1.0 — a 5-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Personio leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Ceipal leads 1, including Customer Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ceipal 30, Personio 40, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Personio 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
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Ceipal and Personio 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 Personio is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ceipal | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Personio 40
2.0 weighted points to Personio
12% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Personio 48
1.2 weighted points to Personio
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ceipal 20 · Personio 25
0.9 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Personio 52
0.9 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Personio 30
0.8 weighted points to Personio
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Personio 48
0.2 weighted points to Personio
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Personio 50
0.2 weighted points to Ceipal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 52 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 48 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 40 (F) | -5 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 2 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 8 | Sources 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; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Personio 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 Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 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