§ The result
Crosschq leads Talogy by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Crosschq, filed under Screening, finishes on 47 and Talogy, filed under Assessment, on 42, 5 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Crosschq: Crosschq is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Talogy on Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Crosschq 62, Talogy 52) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Crosschq 38, Talogy 30), the second being 26% 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
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Crosschq is filed under Screening AI, Talogy under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Crosschq | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Crosschq 38 · Talogy 30
1.4 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Crosschq 62 · Talogy 52
1.2 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Crosschq 40 · Talogy 32
1.0 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Crosschq 58 · Talogy 52
0.9 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Crosschq 30 · Talogy 25
0.8 weighted points to Crosschq
20% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Crosschq 50 · Talogy 53
0.6 weighted points to Talogy
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Crosschq 62 · Talogy 58
0.3 weighted points to Crosschq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Crosschq minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Crosschq | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 53 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 32 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 42 (F) | +5 | +5.0 |
§ 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 | Crosschq | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 22 | 9 | 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; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 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 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Crosschq last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy 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