§ The result
4 points separate Darwinbox and Talogy.
Darwinbox holds a 4-point edge over Talogy under rubric v1.0, 46 to 42, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Talogy takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Darwinbox, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Darwinbox 60, Talogy 53, 20% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage Darwinbox builds across the 5 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
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
Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Talogy under Assessment 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. Only Talogy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Darwinbox | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · Talogy 53
1.4 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · Talogy 52
0.9 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · Talogy 25
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · Talogy 30
0.4 weighted points to Talogy
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · Talogy 52
0.4 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · Talogy 32
0.4 weighted points to Darwinbox
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · Talogy 58
0.1 weighted points to Talogy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.2 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 +3.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 53 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 32 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 42 (F) | +4 | +3.3 |
§ 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 | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox 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