§ The result
impress.ai leads Intervue.io by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, impress.ai, filed under Screening, finishes on 38 and Intervue.io, filed under Video interview, on 31, 7 points apart. impress.ai leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Intervue.io leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (impress.ai 55, Intervue.io 38, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 36% of the weighted advantage impress.ai holds across the 6 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
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, Intervue.io 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 | Intervue.io |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | IN |
| Founded | 2017 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Intervue.io 38
2.5 weighted points to impress.ai
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Intervue.io 12
1.8 weighted points to impress.ai
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · Intervue.io 28
1.4 weighted points to impress.ai
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · Intervue.io 50
0.6 weighted points to impress.ai
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · Intervue.io 22
0.4 weighted points to impress.ai
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Intervue.io 54
0.2 weighted points to Intervue.io
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · Intervue.io 30
0.2 weighted points to impress.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.8 — 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 +7 beside that +6.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Intervue.io.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Intervue.io | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 12 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 22 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 38 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 31 (F) | +7 | +6.8 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Intervue.io 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