§ The result
Hireology leads Cezanne Recruitment by 16 points.
Hireology finishes 16 points clear of Cezanne Recruitment inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 57 against 41. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Hireology: Hireology is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Cezanne Recruitment on Data Governance Disclosure. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cezanne Recruitment 24, Hireology 83) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 68% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 5 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
Hireology
Hireology is an applicant tracking and hiring platform for multi-location auto dealers, healthcare providers and hospitality operators. Its AI features score applicants against employer-defined criteria (AI Match) and run rubric-scored, voice-based first-round screening interviews (AI Interview).
§ The record
Cezanne Recruitment and Hireology are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Cezanne Recruitment | Hireology |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cezanne Recruitment 24 · Hireology 83
10.6 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cezanne Recruitment 40 · Hireology 50
2.0 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cezanne Recruitment 44 · Hireology 59
1.8 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cezanne Recruitment 28 · Hireology 35
1.1 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cezanne Recruitment 54 · Hireology 52
0.3 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cezanne Recruitment 58 · Hireology 57
0.1 weighted points to Cezanne Recruitment
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cezanne Recruitment 57 · Hireology 58
0.1 weighted points to Hireology
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -15.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -16 beside that -15.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cezanne Recruitment minus Hireology.
| Category | Weight | Cezanne Recruitment | Hireology | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 24 | 83 | -59 | -10.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 52 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 59 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 57 (F) | -16 | -15.1 |
§ 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 | Hireology | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 4 | Audit 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; Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Cezanne Recruitment, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cezanne Recruitment last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Hireology 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