§ The result
isolved leads impress.ai by 9 points.
Under rubric v1.0, isolved, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 47 and impress.ai, filed under Screening, on 38, 9 points apart. isolved leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while impress.ai leads 2, including Data Governance Disclosure. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — impress.ai 22, isolved 45 — and at an 18% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage isolved 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
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, isolved under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only impress.ai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | impress.ai | isolved |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 1986 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · isolved 45
4.1 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · isolved 50
3.0 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · isolved 47
1.8 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · isolved 30
0.8 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · isolved 55
0.4 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · isolved 53
0.3 weighted points to impress.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · isolved 56
0.2 weighted points to impress.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 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 -9.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus isolved.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | isolved | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 50 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 45 | -23 | -4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 53 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 47 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 47 (F) | -9 | -9.6 |
§ 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 | isolved | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources 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; isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- isolved 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