§ The result
HiredScore leads impress.ai on 6 of the 7 criteria.
HiredScore sits 14 points above impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 52 against 38 — with HiredScore filed under Sourcing and impress.ai under Screening. HiredScore leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so impress.ai is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 HiredScore leads is Customer Documentation, HiredScore 60 to impress.ai 58. HiredScore takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (HiredScore 65, impress.ai 35), which is 42% of the weighted advantage HiredScore holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, HiredScore 55 to impress.ai 22.
Vendor profile
HiredScore
AI-driven talent orchestration layer that ranks and routes candidates within an existing ATS. Acquired by Workday in 2024.
Vendor profile
impress.ai
impress.ai is a Singapore-headquartered recruitment automation platform that uses conversational AI assistants, resume parsing and scoring, and structured competency-based screening to filter, rank and shortlist job candidates, integrating with enterprise ATS systems.
§ The record
HiredScore is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, impress.ai under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only impress.ai is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HiredScore | impress.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiredScore 65 · impress.ai 35
6.0 weighted points to HiredScore
18% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiredScore 55 · impress.ai 22
5.9 weighted points to HiredScore
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiredScore 60 · impress.ai 52
1.0 weighted points to HiredScore
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiredScore 30 · impress.ai 25
0.8 weighted points to HiredScore
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiredScore 35 · impress.ai 32
0.4 weighted points to HiredScore
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiredScore 60 · impress.ai 58
0.2 weighted points to HiredScore
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +14.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +14.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiredScore minus impress.ai.
| Category | Weight | HiredScore | impress.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 35 | +30 | +6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 55 | 22 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 32 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 38 (F) | +14 | +14.2 |
§ 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 | HiredScore | impress.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 7 | 2 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HiredScore has 9 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 7 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiredScore sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 9 for HiredScore, across 1 distinct source domain, and 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiredScore last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- impress.ai 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