§ The result
4 points separate SHL and Crosschq.
SHL (Assessment) edges Crosschq (Screening) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 51 to 47. Crosschq and SHL each lead 2 of the 7 criteria, with 3 level, though the side of the split SHL holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Crosschq 38, SHL 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 52% of the weighted advantage SHL holds across the 2 criteria it leads.
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
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
Crosschq is filed under Screening AI, SHL under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Crosschq | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Crosschq 38 · SHL 50
2.2 weighted points to SHL
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Crosschq 50 · SHL 60
2.0 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Crosschq 62 · SHL 58
0.5 weighted points to Crosschq
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Crosschq 62 · SHL 60
0.2 weighted points to Crosschq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to -3.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Crosschq minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | Crosschq | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 51 (F) | -4 | -3.5 |
§ 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 | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 4 | 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; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Crosschq last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SHL 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