§ The result
Pinpoint leads impress.ai on all 7 criteria.
Pinpoint finishes 19 points clear of impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 38 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Pinpoint leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; impress.ai leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (impress.ai 35, Pinpoint 72, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint holds across the 7 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
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, Pinpoint 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 | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | JE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2017 |
§ 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 · Pinpoint 72
7.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Pinpoint 42
3.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · Pinpoint 52
2.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · Pinpoint 38
1.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Pinpoint 68
1.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Pinpoint 64
1.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · Pinpoint 66
0.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -19.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -19.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 72 | -37 | -7.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 68 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 64 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 52 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 57 (F) | -19 | -19.4 |
§ 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 | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 2 | 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; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint last reviewed
- July 17, 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