§ The result
isolved leads Tengai by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, isolved, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 47 and Tengai, filed under Screening, on 42, 5 points apart. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of isolved: isolved is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Tengai on Human Oversight Design. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (isolved 47, Tengai 33) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (isolved 45, Tengai 33), the second being 38% of the weighted advantage isolved holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
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
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Tengai under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Tengai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | isolved | Tengai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 1986 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Tengai 33
2.2 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Tengai 33
1.7 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Tengai 45
1.0 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · Tengai 50
0.4 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
isolved 55 · Tengai 58
0.4 weighted points to Tengai
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · Tengai 28
0.3 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Tengai 55
0.1 weighted points to isolved
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Tengai.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Tengai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 33 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 33 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 42 (F) | +5 | +5.3 |
§ 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 | isolved | Tengai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 37 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 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 isolved and Tengai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 78 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 42 for Tengai, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved last reviewed
- September 25, 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