§ The result
Phenom takes the total, Darwinbox takes more of the criteria.
Phenom scores 52 and Darwinbox 46 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. Darwinbox leads more of the criteria than Phenom — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Phenom leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Phenom. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Darwinbox 28, Phenom 75) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 90% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
Vendor profile
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
§ The record
Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Phenom under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Darwinbox | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · Phenom 75
8.5 weighted points to Phenom
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · Phenom 55
1.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · Phenom 25
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · Phenom 60
0.6 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · Phenom 30
0.6 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · Phenom 60
0.3 weighted points to Phenom
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · Phenom 55
0.2 weighted points to Darwinbox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.9 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 -6.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus Phenom.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 75 | -47 | -8.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 52 (F) | -6 | -6.8 |
§ 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 | Darwinbox | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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