§ The result
4 points separate HireLogic and Cognisess.
HireLogic holds a 4-point edge over Cognisess under rubric v1.0, 34 to 30, across the Video interview and Assessment cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of HireLogic: HireLogic is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Cognisess on Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cognisess 25, HireLogic 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 59% of the weighted advantage HireLogic holds across the 5 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
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, HireLogic under Video interview AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | HireLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · HireLogic 42
3.4 weighted points to HireLogic
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · HireLogic 15
0.9 weighted points to Cognisess
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · HireLogic 25
0.8 weighted points to HireLogic
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · HireLogic 48
0.7 weighted points to HireLogic
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · HireLogic 28
0.5 weighted points to Cognisess
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · HireLogic 45
0.4 weighted points to HireLogic
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · HireLogic 45
0.4 weighted points to HireLogic
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -4.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus HireLogic.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | HireLogic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 15 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 48 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 34 (F) | -4 | -4.3 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 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; HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireLogic last reviewed
- September 25, 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