§ The result
Hireology leads Personio on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Hireology opens a 17-point lead on Personio, 57 to 40, with both scored in the ATS-integrated cohort. Hireology leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Personio is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Hireology leads is FRIA Support, Hireology 35 to Personio 30. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Hireology 83, Personio 25) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 64% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Hireology
Hireology is an applicant tracking and hiring platform for multi-location auto dealers, healthcare providers and hospitality operators. Its AI features score applicants against employer-defined criteria (AI Match) and run rubric-scored, voice-based first-round screening interviews (AI Interview).
Vendor profile
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
§ The record
Hireology and Personio are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Hireology | Personio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2010 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hireology 83 · Personio 25
10.4 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Hireology 50 · Personio 40
2.0 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hireology 59 · Personio 48
1.3 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hireology 57 · Personio 48
1.1 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Hireology 35 · Personio 30
0.8 weighted points to Hireology
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hireology 58 · Personio 50
0.6 weighted points to Hireology
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 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 +17 beside that +16.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hireology minus Personio.
| Category | Weight | Hireology | Personio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 25 | +58 | +10.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 48 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 59 | 48 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 40 (F) | +17 | +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 | Hireology | Personio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 13 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology and Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hireology last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Personio 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