§ The result
The Predictive Index takes the total, Teamtailor takes more of the criteria.
The Predictive Index (Assessment) edges Teamtailor (ATS-integrated) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 48 to 47. Teamtailor leads more of the criteria than The Predictive Index — 4 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which The Predictive Index leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to The Predictive Index. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — The Predictive Index 45, Teamtailor 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 96% of the weighted advantage The Predictive Index holds across the 2 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
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
The Predictive Index is filed under Assessment AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only The Predictive Index is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | The Predictive Index | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 1955 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
The Predictive Index 45 · Teamtailor 30
2.7 weighted points to The Predictive Index
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
The Predictive Index 35 · Teamtailor 42
1.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
The Predictive Index 55 · Teamtailor 58
0.4 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
The Predictive Index 52 · Teamtailor 54
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
The Predictive Index 60 · Teamtailor 62
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
The Predictive Index 43 · Teamtailor 42
0.1 weighted points to The Predictive Index
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.7 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 +0.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is The Predictive Index minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | The Predictive Index | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 30 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 43 | 42 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 47 (F) | +1 | +0.9 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources 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; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for The Predictive Index, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- The Predictive Index last reviewed
- July 17, 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.