§ The result
Criteria leads Teamtailor by 6 points.
Criteria scores 53 and Teamtailor 47 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Criteria leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Teamtailor leads 2, including FRIA Support, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Criteria 68, Teamtailor 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 4 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
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
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Criteria is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Criteria | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2006 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Teamtailor 50
3.6 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Teamtailor 30
3.2 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Teamtailor 42
1.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Teamtailor 58
0.6 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Teamtailor 54
0.2 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · Teamtailor 62
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 50 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 54 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 47 (F) | +6 | +6.0 |
§ 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 | Criteria | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | 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% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria 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