§ The result
ZipRecruiter leads Cognisess on all 7 criteria.
ZipRecruiter, filed under Sourcing, comes out 10 points above Cognisess, filed under Assessment: 40 against 30 under rubric v1.0. ZipRecruiter takes all 7 criteria from Cognisess without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Bias Audit Transparency, Cognisess 20 to ZipRecruiter 24. The advantage ZipRecruiter holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Cognisess 25, ZipRecruiter 40, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 30% of the weighted points ZipRecruiter 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
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
Cognisess is filed under Assessment AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing 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 | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · ZipRecruiter 40
3.0 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · ZipRecruiter 55
1.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · ZipRecruiter 52
1.5 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · ZipRecruiter 54
1.1 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · ZipRecruiter 27
1.1 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · ZipRecruiter 40
1.0 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · ZipRecruiter 24
0.7 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -9.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 40 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 24 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 27 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 54 | -14 | -1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 40 (F) | -10 | -9.9 |
§ 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 | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 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; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess and ZipRecruiter 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 ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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