§ The result
Entelo leads Cognisess on 4 of the 7 criteria.
Entelo (Sourcing) edges Cognisess (Assessment) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 33 to 30. Entelo leads 4 of the 7 criteria and the remaining 3 are level, so Cognisess is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 4 Entelo leads is Data Governance Disclosure, Cognisess 42 to Entelo 45. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cognisess 25, Entelo 30, 20% weight), is only 39% of the weighted advantage Entelo builds across the 4 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
Entelo
Entelo is an AI-powered talent sourcing and diversity-recruiting platform that aggregates hundreds of millions of public candidate profiles and applies predictive machine-learning models to score, rank, and surface (including underrepresented) candidates for recruiters.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Entelo under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Cognisess is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | Entelo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2011 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Entelo 30
1.0 weighted points to Entelo
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Entelo 25
0.8 weighted points to Entelo
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Entelo 45
0.4 weighted points to Entelo
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Entelo 35
0.4 weighted points to Entelo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to -2.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Entelo.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Entelo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 33 (F) | -3 | -2.6 |
§ 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 | Entelo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 2 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 8 | 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; Entelo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 8 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 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 16 for Entelo, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Entelo 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