§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Teamtailor by 9 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand scores 56 and Teamtailor 47 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Teamtailor leads 2, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cornerstone OnDemand 58, Teamtailor 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 5 criteria 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Cornerstone OnDemand and Teamtailor 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 | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 1999 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Teamtailor 30
5.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
20% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Teamtailor 50
4.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Teamtailor 42
1.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Teamtailor 42
0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Teamtailor 58
0.3 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Teamtailor 62
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Teamtailor 54
0.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 50 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 30 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 47 (F) | +9 | +9.0 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources 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 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 14 | 6 | 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; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 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 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor 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