§ The result
1 point separates Radancy and Personio.
Radancy (Sourcing) edges Personio (ATS-integrated) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 41 to 40. Radancy leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Human Oversight Design, while Personio leads 3, including Post-Market Monitoring. Post-Market Monitoring is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Personio — Personio 48, Radancy 36, on a 12% weight — which is 55% of the weighted advantage Personio holds across the 3 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
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
Personio is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Radancy 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. Only Radancy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Personio | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Personio 48 · Radancy 36
1.4 weighted points to Personio
12% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Personio 48 · Radancy 57
1.1 weighted points to Radancy
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Personio 25 · Radancy 20
0.9 weighted points to Personio
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Personio 52 · Radancy 58
0.9 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Personio 50 · Radancy 60
0.8 weighted points to Radancy
20% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Personio 40 · Radancy 42
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Personio 30 · Radancy 28
0.3 weighted points to Personio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 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 -0.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Personio minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Personio | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 57 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 36 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 41 (F) | -1 | -0.5 |
§ 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 | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 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 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy 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