§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Cornerstone OnDemand (ATS-integrated) and Cognisess (Assessment) are 26 points apart under rubric v1.0, 56 for Cornerstone OnDemand against 30 for Cognisess. Cognisess leads none of the 7 criteria, and Cornerstone OnDemand is ahead on 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cognisess 25, Cornerstone OnDemand 72, 20% weight), is only 36% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Cornerstone OnDemand under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | Cornerstone OnDemand |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 1999 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Cornerstone OnDemand 72
9.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Cornerstone OnDemand 58
6.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60
2.7 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Cornerstone OnDemand 35
2.3 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Cornerstone OnDemand 60
1.6 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Cornerstone OnDemand 55
1.6 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Cornerstone OnDemand 45
1.6 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -25.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -26 beside that -25.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Cornerstone OnDemand.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Cornerstone OnDemand | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 72 | -47 | -9.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 58 | -38 | -6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 35 | -15 | -2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 60 | -18 | -2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 45 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 56 (F) | -26 | -25.9 |
§ 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 | Cognisess | Cornerstone OnDemand | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 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 Cognisess and Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess 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.
§ Where next