§ The result
Hogan Assessments leads Radancy by 6 points.
Hogan Assessments scores 47 and Radancy 41 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Hogan Assessments leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Radancy leads 2, including Data Governance Disclosure. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Hogan Assessments 44, Radancy 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 56% of the weighted advantage Hogan Assessments holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Hogan Assessments
Hogan Assessments provides science-based personality assessments - chiefly the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) - used to predict workplace performance for employee selection and development.
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
Hogan Assessments is filed under Assessment AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Hogan Assessments | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1987 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hogan Assessments 44 · Radancy 20
4.3 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
20% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Hogan Assessments 50 · Radancy 42
1.6 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Hogan Assessments 36 · Radancy 28
1.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Hogan Assessments 52 · Radancy 58
0.9 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hogan Assessments 52 · Radancy 57
0.6 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hogan Assessments 40 · Radancy 36
0.5 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hogan Assessments 62 · Radancy 60
0.2 weighted points to Hogan Assessments
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hogan Assessments minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Hogan Assessments | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 44 | 20 | +24 | +4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 36 | 28 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 36 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 41 (F) | +6 | +6.3 |
§ 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 | Hogan Assessments | 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Hogan Assessments has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Hogan Assessments, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hogan Assessments last reviewed
- July 17, 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