§ The result
Fountain leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Fountain, filed under Screening, comes out 14 points above Cognisess, filed under Assessment: 44 against 30 under rubric v1.0. Fountain leads every one of the 7 criteria, Cognisess none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Cognisess 32 to Fountain 40. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Cognisess 25, Fountain 50, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage Fountain holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Fountain
AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Fountain under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | Fountain |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Fountain 50
5.0 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Fountain 55
1.9 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Fountain 58
1.9 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Fountain 30
1.8 weighted points to Fountain
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Fountain 30
1.5 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Fountain 40
1.0 weighted points to Fountain
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Fountain 52
1.0 weighted points to Fountain
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -14.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Fountain.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Fountain | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 50 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 58 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 44 (F) | -14 | -14.1 |
§ 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 | Cognisess | Fountain | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 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 | 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 | 14 | 6 | 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; Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 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 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Fountain 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