Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs Talogy
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
Concerning
ATS-integrated
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
Greenhouse leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 25 points between Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Talogy (Assessment): 67 (D) for Greenhouse, 42 (F) for Talogy. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Talogy leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Greenhouse 86, Talogy 30) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse7
- Talogy0
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency86 vs 30
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Talogy under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Talogy is in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 1946 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight41% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86Talogy3010.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight61% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78Talogy535.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight74% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58Talogy323.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight84% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42Talogy252.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight91% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Talogy521.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight98% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66Talogy521.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Talogy580.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +24.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 24.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +25 beside that +24.7.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Talogy, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 53 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 30 | +56 | +10.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 52 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 52 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 32 | +26 | +3.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 42F | +25 | +24.7 |
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 | Greenhouse | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 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% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 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.