§ The result
Sapia.ai leads Feenyx on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Sapia.ai opens a 16-point lead on Feenyx, 56 to 40, with both scored in the Assessment cohort. Sapia.ai leads every one of the 7 criteria, Feenyx none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Feenyx 58 to Sapia.ai 62. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Feenyx 42, Sapia.ai 70, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 7 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
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
§ The record
Feenyx and Sapia.ai are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Feenyx | Sapia.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2016 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Feenyx 42 · Sapia.ai 70
5.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Feenyx 25 · Sapia.ai 52
4.9 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Feenyx 50 · Sapia.ai 62
1.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Feenyx 25 · Sapia.ai 35
1.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Feenyx 38 · Sapia.ai 50
1.4 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Feenyx 55 · Sapia.ai 62
0.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Feenyx 58 · Sapia.ai 62
0.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -16.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.2 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 -16.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Feenyx minus Sapia.ai.
| Category | Weight | Feenyx | Sapia.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 70 | -28 | -5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 52 | -27 | -4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 56 (F) | -16 | -16.2 |
§ 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 | Sapia.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources 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; Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Feenyx and Sapia.ai 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 Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Feenyx last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sapia.ai last reviewed
- June 7, 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