§ The result
Paycom leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Paycom scores 50 and Talogy 42 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Paycom is ahead of Talogy on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Customer Documentation at Paycom 60 to Talogy 58. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Paycom 68, Talogy 53, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage Paycom holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Paycom
Paycom is a single-database human capital management and payroll platform whose applicant tracking system automates recruiting with resume parsing, keyword/knockout candidate filtering, automated correspondence, generative job-description writing, and a command-driven AI data-query engine (IWant).
Vendor profile
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Paycom is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Talogy under Assessment 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. Only Talogy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Paycom | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1998 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Paycom 68 · Talogy 53
3.0 weighted points to Paycom
15% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Paycom 62 · Talogy 52
1.5 weighted points to Paycom
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Paycom 38 · Talogy 30
1.4 weighted points to Paycom
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Paycom 30 · Talogy 25
0.8 weighted points to Paycom
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Paycom 38 · Talogy 32
0.7 weighted points to Paycom
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Paycom 55 · Talogy 52
0.4 weighted points to Paycom
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Paycom 60 · Talogy 58
0.2 weighted points to Paycom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +7.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Paycom minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Paycom | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 53 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 50 (F) | 42 (F) | +8 | +7.9 |
§ 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 | Paycom | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Paycom has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Paycom, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Paycom last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy last reviewed
- August 2, 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