§ The result
Feenyx leads XOR on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Feenyx, filed under Assessment, comes out 10 points above XOR, filed under Screening: 40 against 30 under rubric v1.0. XOR is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Feenyx takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Post-Market Monitoring, Feenyx 38 to XOR 33. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Feenyx 42, XOR 20 — and at a 20% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Feenyx holds across the 6 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
XOR
XOR is a text-first conversational-AI recruiting platform that pre-screens and scores high-volume and hourly candidates with recruiter-defined knockout/scoring questions over SMS, WhatsApp, and Messenger, then auto-schedules interviews on the recruiter's calendar.
§ The record
Feenyx is filed under Assessment AI, XOR under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | XOR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Feenyx 42 · XOR 20
4.4 weighted points to Feenyx
12% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Feenyx 58 · XOR 40
2.2 weighted points to Feenyx
18% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Feenyx 25 · XOR 18
1.3 weighted points to Feenyx
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Feenyx 50 · XOR 42
1.2 weighted points to Feenyx
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Feenyx 38 · XOR 33
0.6 weighted points to Feenyx
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Feenyx 55 · XOR 48
0.6 weighted points to Feenyx
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +10.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +10.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Feenyx minus XOR.
| Category | Weight | Feenyx | XOR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 20 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 18 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 30 (F) | +10 | +10.2 |
§ 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 | XOR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; XOR has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for XOR, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Feenyx last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- XOR 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.
§ Where next