§ The result
Plum leads Personio by 14 points.
Plum sits 14 points above Personio under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 40 — with Plum filed under Assessment and Personio under ATS-integrated. Plum leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Personio leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Personio 25, Plum 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 66% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
Vendor profile
Plum
Plum is a pre-employment talent assessment platform that uses a Five-Factor (Big Five) psychometric Discovery Survey and a Talent Match model to score and rank candidates on behavioral "durable skills" for role fit, hiring, and development.
§ The record
Personio is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Plum 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 Plum is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Personio | Plum |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | CA |
| Founded | 2015 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Personio 25 · Plum 83
10.4 weighted points to Plum
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Personio 40 · Plum 58
3.6 weighted points to Plum
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Personio 48 · Plum 36
1.4 weighted points to Personio
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Personio 50 · Plum 63
1.0 weighted points to Plum
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Personio 48 · Plum 52
0.5 weighted points to Plum
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Personio 30 · Plum 28
0.3 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Personio 52 · Plum 54
0.3 weighted points to Plum
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -14.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Personio minus Plum.
| Category | Weight | Personio | Plum | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 58 | -18 | -3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 83 | -58 | -10.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 52 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 36 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 63 | -13 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 54 (F) | -14 | -14.1 |
§ 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 | Personio | Plum | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Personio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains, and 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Plum 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