§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand and Rippling tie at 56.
Cornerstone OnDemand and Rippling tie at 56 under rubric v1.0 inside the ATS-integrated cohort, arriving there from different criteria. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 1 of the 7 criteria and Rippling 6, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cornerstone OnDemand 58, Rippling 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
Cornerstone OnDemand and Rippling 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 and Colorado AI Act. Only Cornerstone OnDemand is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1999 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Rippling 42
2.9 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Rippling 45
1.5 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Rippling 64
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Rippling 60
0.6 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Rippling 64
0.3 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Rippling 47
0.2 weighted points to Rippling
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Rippling 73
0.2 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.3 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 -0.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 73 | -1 | -0.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 45 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 47 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 56 (F) | - | -0.6 |
§ 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 | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own 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 | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; 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 33 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling 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.
§ Where next