§ The result
Textkernel leads Oleeo on all 7 criteria.
Textkernel sits 11 points above Oleeo under rubric v1.0 — 51 against 40 — with Textkernel filed under Sourcing and Oleeo under ATS-integrated. Textkernel is ahead of Oleeo on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at Oleeo 55 to Textkernel 60. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Oleeo 40, Textkernel 55, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 28% of the weighted advantage Textkernel holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
Vendor profile
Textkernel
Textkernel provides AI-powered CV/resume and job parsing, semantic search, and candidate-job matching technology (including the acquired Sovren engine) embedded inside ATS, job board, and HR systems.
§ The record
Oleeo is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Textkernel under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Oleeo | Textkernel |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | NL |
| Founded | 1995 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Oleeo 40 · Textkernel 55
3.0 weighted points to Textkernel
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Oleeo 40 · Textkernel 55
2.7 weighted points to Textkernel
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Oleeo 45 · Textkernel 55
1.5 weighted points to Textkernel
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Oleeo 30 · Textkernel 40
1.2 weighted points to Textkernel
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Oleeo 25 · Textkernel 32
1.1 weighted points to Textkernel
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Oleeo 55 · Textkernel 60
0.6 weighted points to Textkernel
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Oleeo 55 · Textkernel 62
0.6 weighted points to Textkernel
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Oleeo minus Textkernel.
| Category | Weight | Oleeo | Textkernel | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 51 (F) | -11 | -10.6 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | Textkernel | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 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 | 1 | 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% | 10 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Textkernel has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Textkernel, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Oleeo last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Textkernel 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