§ The result
Plum leads Interviewer.AI by 7 points.
Plum scores 54 and Interviewer.AI 47 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Assessment and Video interview cohorts. Plum leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Interviewer.AI leads 3, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Interviewer.AI 35, Plum 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 81% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
Vendor profile
Plum
Plum is a pre-employment talent assessment platform that uses a Five-Factor (Big Five) psychometric Discovery Survey and a Talent Match model to score and rank candidates on behavioral "durable skills" for role fit, hiring, and development.
§ The record
Interviewer.AI is filed under Video interview AI, Plum under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Mobley v. Workday and Colorado AI Act.
| Record | Interviewer.AI | Plum |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | CA |
| Founded | 2018 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Interviewer.AI 35 · Plum 83
8.6 weighted points to Plum
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Interviewer.AI 52 · Plum 58
1.2 weighted points to Plum
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Interviewer.AI 35 · Plum 28
1.1 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Interviewer.AI 60 · Plum 52
1.0 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Interviewer.AI 60 · Plum 54
0.9 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Interviewer.AI 32 · Plum 36
0.5 weighted points to Plum
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Interviewer.AI 58 · Plum 63
0.4 weighted points to Plum
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Interviewer.AI minus Plum.
| Category | Weight | Interviewer.AI | Plum | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 83 | -48 | -8.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 36 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 63 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 54 (F) | -7 | -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 | Interviewer.AI | Plum | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Interviewer.AI last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Plum 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