§ The result
2 points separate Sapia.ai and Plum.
Within the Assessment cohort, Sapia.ai edges Plum by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 56 to 54. Sapia.ai leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Plum leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Plum — Plum 83, Sapia.ai 52, on an 18% weight — which is 99% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
§ The record
Plum and Sapia.ai are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Plum | Sapia.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | CA | AU |
| Founded | 2012 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Plum 83 · Sapia.ai 52
5.6 weighted points to Plum
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Plum 58 · Sapia.ai 70
2.4 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Plum 36 · Sapia.ai 50
1.7 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Plum 54 · Sapia.ai 62
1.2 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Plum 52 · Sapia.ai 62
1.2 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Plum 28 · Sapia.ai 35
1.1 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Plum 63 · Sapia.ai 62
0.1 weighted points to Plum
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -1.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Plum minus Sapia.ai.
| Category | Weight | Plum | Sapia.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 70 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 52 | +31 | +5.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 62 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 50 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 62 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 56 (F) | -2 | -1.9 |
§ 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 | Plum | Sapia.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sapia.ai 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: 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Plum last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sapia.ai 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