§ The result
Interviewer.AI leads impress.ai on 5 of the 7 criteria.
Interviewer.AI scores 47 and impress.ai 38 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Video interview and Screening cohorts. Interviewer.AI leads 5 of the 7 criteria and the remaining 2 are level, so impress.ai is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 5 Interviewer.AI leads is Data Governance Disclosure, impress.ai 55 to Interviewer.AI 60. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (impress.ai 35, Interviewer.AI 52, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage Interviewer.AI holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
impress.ai
impress.ai is a Singapore-headquartered recruitment automation platform that uses conversational AI assistants, resume parsing and scoring, and structured competency-based screening to filter, rank and shortlist job candidates, integrating with enterprise ATS systems.
Vendor profile
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, Interviewer.AI under Video interview AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Assessment.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | impress.ai | Interviewer.AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | SG |
| Founded | 2017 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · Interviewer.AI 52
3.4 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Interviewer.AI 35
2.3 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · Interviewer.AI 35
1.5 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Interviewer.AI 60
1.0 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.8 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -8.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -8.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Interviewer.AI.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Interviewer.AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 52 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 35 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 47 (F) | -9 | -8.9 |
§ 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 | impress.ai | Interviewer.AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Interviewer.AI 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.
§ Where next