HomeCompareFeenyx vs Rippling

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Feenyx vs Rippling

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Rippling leads Feenyx on all 7 criteria.

Under rubric v1.0, Rippling (ATS-integrated) opens a 16-point lead on Feenyx (Assessment), 56 to 40. Of the 7 criteria Feenyx wins none, and the narrowest lead Rippling holds is on Human Oversight Design, Feenyx 58 to Rippling 60. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Feenyx 42, Rippling 73, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage Rippling holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Feenyx is filed under Assessment AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.

Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Feenyx is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordFeenyxRippling
Price tierMidHigh
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20162016

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 38% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Feenyx 42 · Rippling 73

    6.2 weighted points to Rippling

  2. 18% weight · 56% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Feenyx 25 · Rippling 42

    3.1 weighted points to Rippling

  3. 15% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Feenyx 25 · Rippling 45

    3.0 weighted points to Rippling

  4. 15% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Feenyx 50 · Rippling 64

    2.1 weighted points to Rippling

  5. 12% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Feenyx 38 · Rippling 47

    1.1 weighted points to Rippling

  6. 8% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Feenyx 55 · Rippling 64

    0.7 weighted points to Rippling

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Feenyx 58 · Rippling 60

    0.2 weighted points to Rippling

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -16.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -16 beside that -16.4.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Feenyx minus Rippling.

CategoryWeightFeenyxRipplingΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4273-31-6.2
Bias Audit Transparency18%2542-17-3.1
FRIA Support15%2545-20-3.0
Data Governance Disclosure15%5064-14-2.1
Human Oversight Design12%5860-2-0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%3847-9-1.1
Customer Documentation8%5564-9-0.7
Total100%40 (F)56 (F)-16-16.4

§ 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.

CriterionWeightFeenyxRippling
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%80Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domain10Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%305Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain121Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; some documentation or audit rows for Feenyx sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Feenyx last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Rippling 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.