§ The result
iCIMS leads Tengai on 6 of the 7 criteria.
iCIMS sits 13 points above Tengai under rubric v1.0 — 55 against 42 — with iCIMS filed under ATS-integrated and Tengai under Screening. iCIMS leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Tengai is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 iCIMS leads is Data Governance Disclosure, iCIMS 56 to Tengai 50. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (iCIMS 68, Tengai 33) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage iCIMS holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
iCIMS
Enterprise talent-acquisition / applicant tracking platform (the iCIMS Talent Cloud) that adds optional AI features - Candidate Ranking, Talent Match, and a GPT-powered Copilot - to source, rank, and engage candidates.
Vendor profile
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
iCIMS is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Tengai 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. Only Tengai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | iCIMS | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2000 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iCIMS 68 · Tengai 33
6.3 weighted points to iCIMS
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
iCIMS 58 · Tengai 45
2.6 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iCIMS 38 · Tengai 28
1.5 weighted points to iCIMS
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iCIMS 42 · Tengai 33
1.1 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iCIMS 56 · Tengai 50
0.9 weighted points to iCIMS
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iCIMS 62 · Tengai 55
0.6 weighted points to iCIMS
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +12.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +12.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iCIMS minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | iCIMS | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 33 | +35 | +6.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 28 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 33 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 42 (F) | +13 | +12.9 |
§ 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 | iCIMS | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 37 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
iCIMS has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for iCIMS, across 2 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iCIMS last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai last reviewed
- September 25, 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