§ The result
Radancy leads Ceipal by 6 points.
Radancy scores 41 and Ceipal 35 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. Radancy leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Ceipal leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ceipal 30, Radancy 42, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage Radancy holds across the 5 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
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Radancy is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ceipal | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ceipal 30 · Radancy 42
2.4 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ceipal 46 · Radancy 58
1.8 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ceipal 46 · Radancy 57
1.3 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ceipal 53 · Radancy 60
0.6 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ceipal 25 · Radancy 28
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ceipal 38 · Radancy 36
0.2 weighted points to Ceipal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ceipal minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Ceipal | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 46 | 58 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 57 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 36 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 53 | 60 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 41 (F) | -6 | -6.3 |
§ 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 | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 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; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ceipal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy 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