§ The result
SHL leads impress.ai on all 7 criteria.
SHL sits 13 points above impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 51 against 38 — with SHL filed under Assessment and impress.ai under Screening. SHL leads every one of the 7 criteria, impress.ai none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, impress.ai 58 to SHL 60. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (impress.ai 22, SHL 50, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 39% of the weighted advantage SHL 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
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, SHL under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | impress.ai | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SG | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | 1977 |
§ 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 · SHL 50
5.0 weighted points to SHL
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · SHL 60
5.0 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · SHL 40
1.0 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · SHL 30
0.8 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · SHL 58
0.7 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · SHL 58
0.4 weighted points to SHL
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · SHL 60
0.2 weighted points to SHL
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -13.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 60 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 50 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 40 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 51 (F) | -13 | -13.1 |
§ 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 | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 15 | 4 | 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; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SHL 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