§ The result
Intervue.io takes the total, XOR takes more of the criteria.
Intervue.io (Video interview) edges XOR (Screening) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 31 to 30. XOR leads more of the criteria than Intervue.io — 4 to 3 — but Human Oversight Design, which Intervue.io leads, carries 12% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Intervue.io. One criterion, Human Oversight Design, is both the widest raw gap (Intervue.io 54, XOR 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 12% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage Intervue.io holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
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
Intervue.io is filed under Video interview AI, XOR under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Intervue.io | XOR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2020 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Intervue.io 54 · XOR 40
1.7 weighted points to Intervue.io
20% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Intervue.io 28 · XOR 20
1.6 weighted points to Intervue.io
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Intervue.io 12 · XOR 18
1.1 weighted points to XOR
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Intervue.io 38 · XOR 42
0.6 weighted points to XOR
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Intervue.io 22 · XOR 25
0.4 weighted points to XOR
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Intervue.io 30 · XOR 33
0.4 weighted points to XOR
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Intervue.io 50 · XOR 48
0.2 weighted points to Intervue.io
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +0.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Intervue.io minus XOR.
| Category | Weight | Intervue.io | XOR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 20 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 18 | -6 | -1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 40 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 48 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 31 (F) | 30 (F) | +1 | +0.9 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | XOR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | — | 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% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 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; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains, and 18 for XOR, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Intervue.io last reviewed
- September 25, 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