HomeCompareCezanne Recruitment vs Cornerstone OnDemand

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cezanne Recruitment vs Cornerstone OnDemand

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Cornerstone OnDemand leads Cezanne Recruitment by 15 points.

The ATS-integrated cohort pairing of Cornerstone OnDemand and Cezanne Recruitment comes out 56 to 41 under rubric v1.0, a 15-point lead for Cornerstone OnDemand. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Cornerstone OnDemand: Cornerstone OnDemand is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Cezanne Recruitment on Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation, at 20%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Cornerstone OnDemand (Cezanne Recruitment 40, Cornerstone OnDemand 72), 43% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Bias Audit Transparency, Cezanne Recruitment 24 to Cornerstone OnDemand 58.

§ The record

Cezanne Recruitment and Cornerstone OnDemand 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, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Cornerstone OnDemand is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCezanne RecruitmentCornerstone OnDemand
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersGBUS
Founded20121999

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 42% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cezanne Recruitment 40 · Cornerstone OnDemand 72

    6.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  2. 18% weight · 82% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Cezanne Recruitment 24 · Cornerstone OnDemand 58

    6.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  3. 15% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cezanne Recruitment 28 · Cornerstone OnDemand 35

    1.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  4. 15% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cezanne Recruitment 54 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60

    0.9 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  5. 12% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Cezanne Recruitment 58 · Cornerstone OnDemand 55

    0.4 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment

  6. 8% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cezanne Recruitment 57 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60

    0.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Cezanne Recruitment 44 · Cornerstone OnDemand 45

    0.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 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 -14.5.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cezanne Recruitment minus Cornerstone OnDemand.

CategoryWeightCezanne RecruitmentCornerstone OnDemandΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4072-32-6.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%2458-34-6.1
FRIA Support15%2835-7-1.1
Data Governance Disclosure15%5460-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5855+3+0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%4445-1-0.1
Customer Documentation8%5760-3-0.2
Total100%41 (F)56 (F)-15-14.5

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCezanne RecruitmentCornerstone OnDemand
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domain30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%256Sources on the vendor's own domain155Audit reportSources 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; Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Cezanne Recruitment, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Cezanne Recruitment last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
June 7, 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.