§ The result
Criteria leads impress.ai on all 7 criteria.
Criteria finishes 15 points clear of impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 53 against 38 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Criteria leads every one of the 7 criteria, impress.ai none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Criteria 60 to impress.ai 58. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Criteria 68, impress.ai 35 — and at a 20% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
Vendor profile
impress.ai
impress.ai is a Singapore-headquartered recruitment automation platform that uses conversational AI assistants, resume parsing and scoring, and structured competency-based screening to filter, rank and shortlist job candidates, integrating with enterprise ATS systems.
§ The record
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, impress.ai under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Criteria | impress.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2006 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · impress.ai 35
6.6 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · impress.ai 22
4.7 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · impress.ai 32
1.2 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · impress.ai 25
1.1 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · impress.ai 55
1.1 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · impress.ai 52
0.5 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · impress.ai 58
0.2 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 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 +15.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus impress.ai.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | impress.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 35 | +33 | +6.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 22 | +26 | +4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 32 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 38 (F) | +15 | +15.2 |
§ 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 | Criteria | impress.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- impress.ai 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