§ The result
Cezanne Recruitment leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Cezanne Recruitment sits 11 points above Cognisess under rubric v1.0 — 41 against 30 — with Cezanne Recruitment filed under ATS-integrated and Cognisess under Assessment. Cezanne Recruitment is ahead of Cognisess on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Cezanne Recruitment 24 to Cognisess 20. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Cezanne Recruitment 57, Cognisess 40) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cezanne Recruitment 40, Cognisess 25), 26% of the weighted advantage Cezanne Recruitment builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cezanne Recruitment
Cezanne Recruitment (formerly Occupop) is an applicant tracking system for SMEs that handles job posting, candidate management and interview scheduling. In its Recruitment PLUS+ tier it uses AI to score each CV from 0 to 100 against the job description, alongside weighted screening-question scores, knockout filters and optional AI anonymisation of CVs for hiring-manager review.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
§ The record
Cezanne Recruitment is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Cognisess under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Cognisess is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cezanne Recruitment | Cognisess |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2012 | 2011 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cezanne Recruitment 40 · Cognisess 25
3.0 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
12% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cezanne Recruitment 58 · Cognisess 42
1.9 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
15% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cezanne Recruitment 54 · Cognisess 42
1.8 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cezanne Recruitment 44 · Cognisess 32
1.4 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cezanne Recruitment 57 · Cognisess 40
1.4 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cezanne Recruitment 28 · Cognisess 20
1.2 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cezanne Recruitment 24 · Cognisess 20
0.7 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +11 beside that +11.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cezanne Recruitment minus Cognisess.
| Category | Weight | Cezanne Recruitment | Cognisess | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 25 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 24 | 20 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 20 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 42 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 32 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 40 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 30 (F) | +11 | +11.4 |
§ 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 | Cezanne Recruitment | Cognisess | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cezanne Recruitment has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Cezanne Recruitment, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cezanne Recruitment last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Cognisess 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