§ The result
Saville Assessment leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Saville Assessment opens an 18-point lead on Cognisess, 48 to 30, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Saville Assessment leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Cognisess leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Cognisess 25, Saville Assessment 50, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 28% of the weighted advantage Saville Assessment 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
Saville Assessment
Saville Assessment publishes the Wave personality questionnaires, Swift aptitude tests and situational judgment tests. They are scored automatically against norm groups and delivered through the Oasys platform, the Wave Connect hiring platform (which uses AI to build role profiles from job descriptions) and a two-minute Screener that returns a fit band into the employer's ATS.
§ The record
Cognisess and Saville Assessment are both filed under Assessment 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 | Saville Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2011 | 2004 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Saville Assessment 50
5.0 weighted points to Saville Assessment
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Saville Assessment 42
4.0 weighted points to Saville Assessment
15% weight · 67% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Saville Assessment 40
3.0 weighted points to Saville Assessment
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Saville Assessment 55
1.9 weighted points to Saville Assessment
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Saville Assessment 60
1.6 weighted points to Saville Assessment
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Saville Assessment 55
1.6 weighted points to Saville Assessment
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Saville Assessment 38
0.7 weighted points to Saville Assessment
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -18 beside that -17.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Saville Assessment.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Saville Assessment | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 50 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 42 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 40 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 48 (F) | -18 | -17.8 |
§ 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 | Saville Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 34 | 6 | 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; Saville Assessment has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and Saville Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 40 for Saville Assessment, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Saville Assessment 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