§ The result
Sense leads Phenom by 6 points.
Sense scores 58 and Phenom 52 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. Sense leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Phenom leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Phenom 30, Sense 52 — and at a 12% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Sense holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Phenom
Talent experience platform combining a career site CMS, candidate CRM, internal mobility, and conversational AI for screening and scheduling.
Vendor profile
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
§ The record
Phenom is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Sense under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Scheduling.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Phenom | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2010 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Phenom 30 · Sense 52
2.6 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 61% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Phenom 25 · Sense 38
1.9 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Phenom 55 · Sense 60
1.0 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Phenom 55 · Sense 62
0.6 weighted points to Sense
18% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Phenom 75 · Sense 72
0.5 weighted points to Phenom
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Phenom 60 · Sense 64
0.5 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Phenom 60 · Sense 58
0.3 weighted points to Phenom
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Phenom minus Sense.
| Category | Weight | Phenom | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 75 | 72 | +3 | +0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 52 | -22 | -2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 58 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | Phenom | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | — | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 8 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Phenom has 10 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 8 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 29 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 10 for Phenom, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Phenom last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sense 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