§ The result
Findem leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 28 points between Findem (Sourcing) and Cognisess (Assessment): 58 for Findem, 30 for Cognisess. Findem leads every one of the 7 criteria, Cognisess none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Cognisess 32 to Findem 42. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cognisess 20, Findem 83) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage Findem holds 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
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Findem 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 | Findem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Findem 83
11.3 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Findem 58
6.6 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Findem 38
2.7 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Findem 57
2.3 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Findem 60
2.2 weighted points to Findem
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Findem 58
1.4 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Findem 42
1.2 weighted points to Findem
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -27.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 27.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -28 beside that -27.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Findem.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Findem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 58 | -33 | -6.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 83 | -63 | -11.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 38 | -18 | -2.7 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 57 | -15 | -2.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 60 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 58 (F) | -28 | -27.7 |
§ 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 | Findem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | 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 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 12 | 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; Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Findem 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