HomeCompareHireology vs Sense

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Hireology vs Sense

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

1 point separates Sense and Hireology.

Sense holds a 1-point edge over Hireology under rubric v1.0, 58 to 57, across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. Sense leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Hireology leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. Sense takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Hireology 50, Sense 60), which is 44% of the weighted advantage Sense holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, Hireology 83 to Sense 72.

§ The record

Hireology is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Sense under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.

RecordHireologySense
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20102016

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 27% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Hireology 50 · Sense 60

    2.0 weighted points to Sense

  2. 18% weight · 54% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Hireology 83 · Sense 72

    2.0 weighted points to Hireology

  3. 15% weight · 67% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Hireology 52 · Sense 58

    0.9 weighted points to Sense

  4. 12% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Hireology 57 · Sense 64

    0.8 weighted points to Sense

  5. 12% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Hireology 59 · Sense 52

    0.8 weighted points to Hireology

  6. 15% weight · 96% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Hireology 35 · Sense 38

    0.4 weighted points to Sense

  7. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Hireology 58 · Sense 62

    0.3 weighted points to Sense

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.7.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Hireology minus Sense.

CategoryWeightHireologySenseΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5060-10-2.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%8372+11+2.0
FRIA Support15%3538-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5258-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5764-7-0.8
Post-Market Monitoring12%5952+7+0.8
Customer Documentation8%5862-4-0.3
Total100%57 (F)58 (F)-1-1.7

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHireologySense
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%40Audit reportSources on a separate domain30Audit reportSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain11Sources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%40Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%254Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain163Audit reportSources 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; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology and Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Hireology last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Sense last reviewed
June 7, 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.