§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Feenyx by 16 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand finishes 16 points clear of Feenyx under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 40 — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Feenyx leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap (Cornerstone OnDemand 58, Feenyx 25) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cornerstone OnDemand 72, Feenyx 42), 37% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cornerstone OnDemand
Cornerstone OnDemand is an enterprise talent-management and learning suite whose Cornerstone Galaxy platform uses AI-driven skills extraction and matching (including the acquired SkyHive Skills Models) to power recruiting, candidate screening, and workforce development.
Vendor profile
Feenyx
Feenyx (formerly Filtered.ai) is a skills-assessment and interview platform that runs AI-scored asynchronous coding, video and written assessments and AI-assisted live interviews, with resume scoring, candidate matching, identity verification and fraud/AI-use detection.
§ The record
Cornerstone OnDemand is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Feenyx under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | Feenyx |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1999 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Feenyx 42
6.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Feenyx 25
5.9 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Feenyx 25
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Feenyx 50
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Feenyx 38
0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Feenyx 55
0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Feenyx 58
0.4 weighted points to Feenyx
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +15.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Feenyx.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Feenyx | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 42 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 25 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 40 (F) | +16 | +15.8 |
§ 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 | Cornerstone OnDemand | Feenyx | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 30 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cornerstone OnDemand and Feenyx sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Feenyx 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