§ The result
Hireology leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Hireology (ATS-integrated) and Cognisess (Assessment) are 27 points apart under rubric v1.0, 57 for Hireology against 30 for Cognisess. Cognisess leads none of the 7 criteria, and Hireology is ahead on 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cognisess 20, Hireology 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Hireology 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
Hireology
Hireology is an applicant tracking and hiring platform for multi-location auto dealers, healthcare providers and hospitality operators. Its AI features score applicants against employer-defined criteria (AI Match) and run rubric-scored, voice-based first-round screening interviews (AI Interview).
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Hireology under ATS-integrated 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 | Hireology |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Hireology 83
11.3 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Hireology 50
5.0 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Hireology 59
3.2 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Hireology 35
2.3 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Hireology 57
1.8 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Hireology 52
1.5 weighted points to Hireology
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Hireology 58
1.4 weighted points to Hireology
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -26.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 26.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -27 beside that -26.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Hireology.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Hireology | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 50 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 83 | -63 | -11.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 35 | -15 | -2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 57 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 59 | -27 | -3.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 57 (F) | -27 | -26.6 |
§ 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 | Hireology | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 25 | 4 | 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; Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and Hireology 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 Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Hireology 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