§ The result
Phenom leads impress.ai by 14 points.
Phenom sits 14 points above impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 52 against 38 — with Phenom filed under Sourcing and impress.ai under Screening. Phenom leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while impress.ai leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — impress.ai 22, Phenom 75 — and at an 18% weight it carries 63% of the weighted advantage Phenom holds across the 4 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
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, Phenom under Candidate sourcing 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 | Phenom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Phenom 75
9.5 weighted points to Phenom
20% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · Phenom 55
4.0 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Phenom 60
1.0 weighted points to Phenom
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Phenom 60
0.8 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · Phenom 30
0.2 weighted points to impress.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · Phenom 55
0.2 weighted points to impress.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -14.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -14.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Phenom.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Phenom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 55 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 75 | -53 | -9.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 52 (F) | -14 | -14.8 |
§ 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 | Phenom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources 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; Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 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