§ The result
Teamtailor leads Personio by 7 points.
Teamtailor scores 47 and Personio 40 under rubric v1.0 — a 7-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Teamtailor leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Personio leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: FRIA Support (Personio 30, Teamtailor 42) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Personio 40, Teamtailor 50), the second being 27% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 6 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Personio and Teamtailor are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Personio | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | SE |
| Founded | 2015 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Personio 40 · Teamtailor 50
2.0 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 48% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Personio 30 · Teamtailor 42
1.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
8% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Personio 50 · Teamtailor 62
1.0 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Personio 25 · Teamtailor 30
0.9 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Personio 52 · Teamtailor 58
0.9 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Personio 48 · Teamtailor 54
0.7 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Personio 48 · Teamtailor 42
0.7 weighted points to Personio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Personio minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Personio | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 54 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 47 (F) | -7 | -6.6 |
§ 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 | Personio | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 14 | 6 | 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; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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