§ The result
impress.ai leads XOR by 8 points.
impress.ai scores 38 and XOR 30 under rubric v1.0 — an 8-point gap inside the Screening cohort. impress.ai leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while XOR leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (impress.ai 35, XOR 20, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage impress.ai 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
XOR
XOR is a text-first conversational-AI recruiting platform that pre-screens and scores high-volume and hourly candidates with recruiter-defined knockout/scoring questions over SMS, WhatsApp, and Messenger, then auto-schedules interviews on the recruiter's calendar.
§ The record
impress.ai and XOR are both filed under Screening 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 | XOR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · XOR 20
3.0 weighted points to impress.ai
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · XOR 42
1.9 weighted points to impress.ai
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · XOR 40
1.4 weighted points to impress.ai
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
impress.ai 58 · XOR 48
0.8 weighted points to impress.ai
18% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · XOR 18
0.7 weighted points to impress.ai
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · XOR 33
0.1 weighted points to XOR
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus XOR.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | XOR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 18 | +4 | +0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 40 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 30 (F) | +8 | +7.8 |
§ 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 | XOR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 7 | 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; XOR has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for XOR, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- XOR 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