§ The result
Rippling leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Rippling sits 14 points above Talogy under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 42 — with Rippling filed under ATS-integrated and Talogy under Assessment. Rippling leads every one of the 7 criteria, Talogy none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Rippling 64 to Talogy 58. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Rippling 73, Talogy 53, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 28% of the weighted advantage Rippling holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
Vendor profile
Talogy
Talogy sells psychometric talent-assessment products - cognitive ability tests (Logiks, Mindgage), personality inventories (Caliper, P.A.P.I.), values-based screening, situational judgement and job simulations, and 360 feedback - delivered through its TalogyTech platform for candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Rippling is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Talogy under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Talogy is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Rippling | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Rippling 73 · Talogy 53
4.0 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 49% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Rippling 45 · Talogy 25
3.0 weighted points to Rippling
18% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Rippling 42 · Talogy 30
2.2 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Rippling 64 · Talogy 52
1.8 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Rippling 47 · Talogy 32
1.8 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Rippling 60 · Talogy 52
1.0 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Rippling 64 · Talogy 58
0.5 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +14.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Rippling minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Rippling | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 73 | 53 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 45 | 25 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 52 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 32 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 42 (F) | +14 | +14.2 |
§ 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 | Rippling | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Rippling last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Talogy 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