§ The result
micro1 leads Cognisess by 6 points.
micro1 scores 36 and Cognisess 30 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. micro1 leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Cognisess leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Cognisess 25, micro1 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 73% of the weighted advantage micro1 holds across the 5 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
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, micro1 under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cognisess | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · micro1 50
5.0 weighted points to micro1
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · micro1 25
0.8 weighted points to Cognisess
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · micro1 48
0.7 weighted points to micro1
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · micro1 45
0.4 weighted points to micro1
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · micro1 45
0.4 weighted points to micro1
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · micro1 22
0.3 weighted points to micro1
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 50 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 22 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 48 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 36 (F) | -6 | -6.0 |
§ 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 | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | 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 | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 8 | 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; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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