HomeCompareCornerstone OnDemand vs impress.ai

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cornerstone OnDemand vs impress.ai

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Cornerstone OnDemand leads impress.ai on all 7 criteria.

Cornerstone OnDemand finishes 18 points clear of impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 38 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Cornerstone OnDemand leads every one of the 7 criteria, impress.ai none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Cornerstone OnDemand 60 to impress.ai 58. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cornerstone OnDemand 72, impress.ai 35 — and at a 20% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Cornerstone OnDemand is filed under ATS-integrated AI, impress.ai under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Assessment.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCornerstone OnDemandimpress.ai
Price tierEnterpriseHigh
HeadquartersUSSG
Founded19992017

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 41% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · impress.ai 35

    7.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  2. 18% weight · 76% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · impress.ai 22

    6.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  3. 12% weight · 85% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · impress.ai 32

    1.6 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  4. 15% weight · 93% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · impress.ai 25

    1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  5. 15% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · impress.ai 55

    0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  6. 12% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · impress.ai 52

    0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  7. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · impress.ai 58

    0.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +18.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +18 beside that +18.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus impress.ai.

CategoryWeightCornerstone OnDemandimpress.aiΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%7235+37+7.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%5822+36+6.5
FRIA Support15%3525+10+1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%6055+5+0.8
Human Oversight Design12%5552+3+0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%4532+13+1.6
Customer Documentation8%6058+2+0.2
Total100%56 (F)38 (F)+18+18.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCornerstone OnDemandimpress.ai
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%30Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%155Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain187Sources on the vendor's own domain

Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
impress.ai last reviewed
August 2, 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.