§ The result
Radancy leads HireLogic on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Radancy, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 41 and HireLogic, filed under Video interview, on 34, 7 points apart. HireLogic is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Radancy takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is FRIA Support, HireLogic 25 to Radancy 28. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (HireLogic 45, Radancy 60) and Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (HireLogic 45, Radancy 58), the second being 30% of the weighted advantage Radancy holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
Vendor profile
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
HireLogic is filed under Video interview AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| Record | HireLogic | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HireLogic 45 · Radancy 58
1.9 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HireLogic 45 · Radancy 60
1.2 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HireLogic 48 · Radancy 57
1.1 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HireLogic 28 · Radancy 36
1.0 weighted points to Radancy
18% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HireLogic 15 · Radancy 20
0.9 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HireLogic 25 · Radancy 28
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HireLogic minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | HireLogic | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 15 | 20 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 57 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 36 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 60 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 34 (F) | 41 (F) | -7 | -6.5 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 2 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HireLogic last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy 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