§ The result
Crosschq leads Oleeo by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Crosschq, filed under Screening, finishes on 47 and Oleeo, filed under ATS-integrated, on 40, 7 points apart. Oleeo takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Crosschq, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (Crosschq 58, Oleeo 45) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Crosschq 50, Oleeo 40), the second being 27% of the weighted advantage Crosschq holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Crosschq
Crosschq is a hiring-intelligence platform that combines automated 360 reference checks, an AI Interview Agent that conducts and scores voice/video screening interviews, AI resume matching and ranking, candidate-fraud and identity checks, Traitify personality and cognitive assessments, and quality-of-hire analytics.
Vendor profile
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
Crosschq is filed under Screening AI, Oleeo under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Crosschq is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Crosschq | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Crosschq 50 · Oleeo 40
2.0 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Crosschq 58 · Oleeo 45
1.9 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Crosschq 40 · Oleeo 30
1.2 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Crosschq 62 · Oleeo 55
0.8 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Crosschq 30 · Oleeo 25
0.8 weighted points to Crosschq
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Crosschq 62 · Oleeo 55
0.6 weighted points to Crosschq
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Crosschq 38 · Oleeo 40
0.4 weighted points to Oleeo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 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 +6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Crosschq minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | Crosschq | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 40 (F) | +7 | +6.9 |
§ 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 | Crosschq | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 10 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 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 Crosschq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Crosschq last reviewed
- September 25, 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.
§ Where next