§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Personio by 16 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand finishes 16 points clear of Personio inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 56 against 40. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Personio leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. Cornerstone OnDemand takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cornerstone OnDemand 72, Personio 40), which is 40% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, Cornerstone OnDemand 58 to Personio 25.
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
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Cornerstone OnDemand and Personio are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Cornerstone OnDemand is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 1999 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Personio 40
6.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Personio 25
5.9 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Personio 52
1.2 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Personio 48
0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Personio 50
0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Personio 30
0.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Personio 48
0.4 weighted points to Personio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.3 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 +15.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 40 | +32 | +6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 25 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 48 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 40 (F) | +16 | +15.6 |
§ 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 | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 13 | 8 | Sources 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; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cornerstone OnDemand and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio 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.
§ Where next