§ The result
Feenyx and Personio tie at 40.
Feenyx, filed under Assessment, and Personio, filed under ATS-integrated, tie at 40 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Feenyx leads 3 of the 7 criteria and Personio 3, with 1 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Human Oversight Design is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Feenyx 58, Personio 48 — and at a 12% weight it carries 60% of the weighted advantage Feenyx holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Feenyx
Feenyx (formerly Filtered.ai) is a skills-assessment and interview platform that runs AI-scored asynchronous coding, video and written assessments and AI-assisted live interviews, with resume scoring, candidate matching, identity verification and fraud/AI-use detection.
Vendor profile
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Feenyx is filed under Assessment AI, Personio under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Sourcing.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Feenyx is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Feenyx | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2016 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Feenyx 58 · Personio 48
1.2 weighted points to Feenyx
12% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Feenyx 38 · Personio 48
1.2 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Feenyx 25 · Personio 30
0.8 weighted points to Personio
20% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Feenyx 42 · Personio 40
0.4 weighted points to Feenyx
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Feenyx 55 · Personio 50
0.4 weighted points to Feenyx
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Feenyx 50 · Personio 52
0.3 weighted points to Personio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -0.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.3 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 -0.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Feenyx minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Feenyx | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 40 (F) | - | -0.2 |
§ 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 | Feenyx | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Feenyx and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Feenyx last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio 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