§ The result
The Predictive Index leads Radancy by 7 points.
The Predictive Index scores 48 and Radancy 41 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. The Predictive Index leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Radancy leads 2, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — The Predictive Index 45, Radancy 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 56% of the weighted advantage The Predictive Index holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
The Predictive Index
The Predictive Index provides validated behavioral and cognitive psychometric assessments used to screen, hire, and develop employees and design teams, alongside AI-assisted talent-management software.
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
The Predictive Index is filed under Assessment AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing 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 | The Predictive Index | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1955 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
The Predictive Index 45 · Radancy 20
4.5 weighted points to The Predictive Index
20% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
The Predictive Index 50 · Radancy 42
1.6 weighted points to The Predictive Index
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
The Predictive Index 35 · Radancy 28
1.1 weighted points to The Predictive Index
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
The Predictive Index 43 · Radancy 36
0.8 weighted points to The Predictive Index
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
The Predictive Index 52 · Radancy 57
0.6 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
The Predictive Index 55 · Radancy 58
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 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 +6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is The Predictive Index minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | The Predictive Index | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 20 | +25 | +4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 43 | 36 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 41 (F) | +7 | +6.9 |
§ 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 | The Predictive Index | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
The Predictive Index has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for The Predictive Index, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- The Predictive Index last reviewed
- July 17, 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