§ The result
Tengai leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Tengai, filed under Screening, comes out 12 points above Cognisess, filed under Assessment: 42 against 30 under rubric v1.0. Tengai takes all 7 criteria and Cognisess none of them; the nearest contest is Post-Market Monitoring, Cognisess 32 to Tengai 33. The advantage Tengai holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cognisess 25, Tengai 45, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 33% of the weighted points Tengai gains across the 7 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
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Tengai 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 | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | SE |
| Founded | 2011 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Tengai 45
4.0 weighted points to Tengai
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Tengai 33
2.3 weighted points to Tengai
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Tengai 58
1.9 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Tengai 28
1.2 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Tengai 50
1.2 weighted points to Tengai
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Tengai 55
1.2 weighted points to Tengai
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Tengai 33
0.1 weighted points to Tengai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -12.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 45 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 33 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 28 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 50 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 58 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 42 (F) | -12 | -12.0 |
§ 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 | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 37 | 5 | 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; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai 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