Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Cognisess vs XOR
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
XOR
XOR is a text-first conversational-AI recruiting platform that pre-screens and scores high-volume and hourly candidates with recruiter-defined knockout/scoring questions over SMS, WhatsApp, and Messenger, then auto-schedules interviews on the recruiter's calendar.
Substantial gaps
Screening
The result
Cognisess and XOR tie at 30.
Cognisess (Assessment) and XOR (Screening) tie at 30 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Cognisess leads 3 of the 7 criteria and XOR 3, with 1 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Article 11 Technical Documentation, at 20%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Cognisess (Cognisess 25, XOR 20), 63% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Customer Documentation, Cognisess 40 to XOR 48.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Cognisess3
- XOR3
- Level1
- Widest raw gap
- Customer Documentation40 vs 48
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, XOR under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Cognisess is in scope of
| Record | Cognisess | XOR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2016 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight32% of the movement so far
Cognisess25XOR201.0 weighted points to Cognisess
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight56% of the movement so far
Cognisess20XOR250.8 weighted points to XOR
- 3
Customer Documentation
8% weight77% of the movement so far
Cognisess40XOR480.6 weighted points to XOR
- 4
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight88% of the movement so far
Cognisess20XOR180.4 weighted points to Cognisess
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight96% of the movement so far
Cognisess42XOR400.2 weighted points to Cognisess
- 6
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
Cognisess32XOR330.1 weighted points to XOR
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +0.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus XOR, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | XOR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 18 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 48 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 30F | 30F | - | +0.1 |
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 | XOR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; XOR has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 18 for XOR, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- XOR last reviewed
- July 17, 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.