§ The result
4 points separate Tengai and impress.ai.
Under rubric v1.0, Tengai and impress.ai finish 4 points apart, 42 to 38, as two Screening entries. impress.ai takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Data Governance Disclosure among them, against 5 for Tengai, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (impress.ai 22, Tengai 33) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (impress.ai 35, Tengai 45), the second being 38% of the weighted advantage Tengai 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
Tengai
Tengai runs structured screening interviews through a browser-based AI avatar and combines candidates' yes/no qualification answers, a Five-Factor-based personality score and recruiter ratings of open answers into an automatically ranked shortlist.
§ The record
impress.ai and Tengai are both filed under Screening AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Assessment and 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 | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | SE |
| Founded | 2017 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · Tengai 45
2.0 weighted points to Tengai
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Tengai 33
2.0 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Tengai 50
0.8 weighted points to impress.ai
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Tengai 58
0.7 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · Tengai 28
0.4 weighted points to Tengai
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · Tengai 55
0.2 weighted points to impress.ai
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · Tengai 33
0.1 weighted points to Tengai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -4.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 45 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 33 | -11 | -2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 42 (F) | -4 | -4.3 |
§ 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 | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 37 | 5 | 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; Tengai has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 37 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tengai 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