HomeCompareCovey vs Oleeo

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Covey vs Oleeo

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Covey leads Oleeo by 7 points.

Covey scores 47 and Oleeo 40 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. Covey leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Oleeo leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 3 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Covey 72, Oleeo 40 — and at an 18% weight it carries 82% of the weighted advantage Covey holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Covey is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Oleeo under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

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

RecordCoveyOleeo
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded20181995

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Covey 72 · Oleeo 40

    5.8 weighted points to Covey

  2. 15% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Covey 52 · Oleeo 45

    1.1 weighted points to Covey

  3. 12% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Covey 52 · Oleeo 55

    0.4 weighted points to Oleeo

  4. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Covey 58 · Oleeo 55

    0.2 weighted points to Covey

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +6.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.7.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Covey minus Oleeo.

CategoryWeightCoveyOleeoΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4040--
Bias Audit Transparency18%7240+32+5.8
FRIA Support15%2525--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5245+7+1.1
Human Oversight Design12%5255-3-0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%3030--
Customer Documentation8%5855+3+0.2
Total100%47 (F)40 (F)+7+6.7

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCoveyOleeo
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%20Audit reportSources on a separate domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%0101
Data Governance Disclosure15%0121Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%11Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%0111Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%20Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%65Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain106Sources on the vendor's own domain

Covey has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Covey sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 27 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Covey, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Covey last reviewed
June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Oleeo 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.