Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Crosschq vs Teamtailor
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.
Substantial gaps
Screening
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.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Crosschq and Teamtailor tie at 47.
Crosschq, filed under Screening, and Teamtailor, filed under ATS-integrated, tie at 47 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Crosschq leads 2 of the 7 criteria and Teamtailor 2, with 3 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Crosschq 30, Teamtailor 42 — and at a 15% weight it carries 88% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Crosschq2
- Teamtailor2
- Level3
- Widest raw gap
- FRIA Support30 vs 42
- Heaviest weighted swing
- FRIA Support15% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Crosschq is filed under Screening AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Crosschq is in scope of
| Record | Crosschq | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2018 | 2013 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
FRIA Support
15% weight41% of the movement so far
Crosschq30Teamtailor421.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight73% of the movement so far
Crosschq38Teamtailor301.4 weighted points to Crosschq
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
Crosschq62Teamtailor541.0 weighted points to Crosschq
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight100% of the movement so far
Crosschq40Teamtailor420.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Crosschq minus Teamtailor, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Crosschq | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 47F | 47F | - | +0.4 |
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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Crosschq last reviewed
- September 25, 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.