§ The result
Criteria leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
The Assessment cohort pairing of Criteria and Cognisess comes out 53 to 30 under rubric v1.0, a 23-point lead for Criteria. Criteria leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Cognisess leads none. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cognisess 25, Criteria 68, 20% weight), is only 38% of the weighted advantage Criteria 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
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
§ The record
Cognisess and Criteria are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Criteria 68
8.6 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Criteria 48
5.0 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Criteria 62
3.0 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Criteria 32
1.8 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Criteria 56
1.7 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Criteria 60
1.6 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Criteria 42
1.2 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -22.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -22.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Criteria.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Criteria | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 68 | -43 | -8.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 48 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 32 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 62 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 56 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 53 (F) | -23 | -22.9 |
§ 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 | Criteria | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | 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 | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 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 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Criteria 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