§ The result
Interviewer.AI and Teamtailor tie at 47.
Interviewer.AI (Video interview) and Teamtailor (ATS-integrated) tie at 47 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Interviewer.AI leads 4 of the 7 criteria and Teamtailor 3, yet the two totals land on the same number. Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Interviewer.AI 32, Teamtailor 42 — and at a 12% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 3 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Interviewer.AI is filed under Video interview AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Interviewer.AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Interviewer.AI | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | SE |
| Founded | 2018 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Interviewer.AI 32 · Teamtailor 42
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 46% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Interviewer.AI 35 · Teamtailor 42
1.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Interviewer.AI 35 · Teamtailor 30
0.9 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Interviewer.AI 60 · Teamtailor 54
0.7 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
20% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Interviewer.AI 52 · Teamtailor 50
0.4 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Interviewer.AI 58 · Teamtailor 62
0.3 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Interviewer.AI 60 · Teamtailor 58
0.3 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Interviewer.AI minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Interviewer.AI | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 50 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 47 (F) | - | -0.3 |
§ 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 | Interviewer.AI | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | 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; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Interviewer.AI last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor 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