§ The result
1 point separates Intervue.io and Cognisess.
Intervue.io holds a 1-point edge over Cognisess under rubric v1.0, 31 to 30, across the Video interview and Assessment cohorts. Intervue.io leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Human Oversight Design, while Cognisess leads 3, including Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Cognisess takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Cognisess 20 to Intervue.io 12, 63% of the weighted advantage Cognisess holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Human Oversight Design, Cognisess 42 to Intervue.io 54.
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
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Intervue.io 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 | Intervue.io |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | IN |
| Founded | 2011 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Intervue.io 12
1.4 weighted points to Cognisess
12% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Intervue.io 54
1.4 weighted points to Intervue.io
8% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Intervue.io 50
0.8 weighted points to Intervue.io
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Intervue.io 28
0.6 weighted points to Intervue.io
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Intervue.io 38
0.6 weighted points to Cognisess
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Intervue.io 22
0.3 weighted points to Intervue.io
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Intervue.io 30
0.2 weighted points to Cognisess
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Intervue.io.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Intervue.io | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 12 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 54 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 31 (F) | -1 | -0.9 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 5 | 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 30 | 7 | Sources 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; Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Intervue.io 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