§ The result
Tribepad leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 26 points between Tribepad (ATS-integrated) and Cognisess (Assessment): 56 for Tribepad, 30 for Cognisess. Tribepad leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Cognisess leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Cognisess 20, Tribepad 78) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 40% of the weighted advantage Tribepad holds 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
Tribepad
Tribepad is a UK applicant tracking system whose built-in Sidekick AI assistant scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted skills and generates candidate summaries, SWOT analyses, job descriptions, salary suggestions and interview questions.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, Tribepad 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 | Tribepad |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 2011 | 2008 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Tribepad 78
10.4 weighted points to Tribepad
20% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Tribepad 56
6.2 weighted points to Tribepad
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Tribepad 54
2.6 weighted points to Tribepad
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Tribepad 56
2.1 weighted points to Tribepad
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Tribepad 58
1.9 weighted points to Tribepad
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Tribepad 30
1.5 weighted points to Tribepad
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Tribepad 58
1.4 weighted points to Tribepad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -26.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 26.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -26 beside that -26.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Tribepad.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Tribepad | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 56 | -31 | -6.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 78 | -58 | -10.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 56 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 58 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 54 | -22 | -2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 56 (F) | -26 | -26.2 |
§ 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 | Tribepad | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 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; Tribepad has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and Tribepad sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 32 for Tribepad, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tribepad 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