§ The result
Cornerstone OnDemand leads Willo by 15 points.
Cornerstone OnDemand finishes 15 points clear of Willo under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 41 — across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. Cornerstone OnDemand leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Willo leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cornerstone OnDemand 72, Willo 38 — and at a 20% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 6 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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
§ The record
Cornerstone OnDemand is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Willo under Video interview 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.
| Record | Cornerstone OnDemand | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1999 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Willo 38
6.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Willo 30
5.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Willo 25
1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Willo 36
1.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Willo 53
1.1 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Willo 62
0.8 weighted points to Willo
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Willo 54
0.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +15.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Willo.
| Category | Weight | Cornerstone OnDemand | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 72 | 38 | +34 | +6.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 30 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 53 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 36 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 41 (F) | +15 | +15.1 |
§ 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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 1 | 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 | 9 | 5 | Sources 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; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 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 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo last reviewed
- June 7, 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