§ The result
Sapia.ai leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Sapia.ai sits 14 points above Talogy under rubric v1.0, 56 against 42, with both filed under Assessment. Sapia.ai leads every one of the 7 criteria, Talogy none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Sapia.ai 62 to Talogy 58. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Sapia.ai 52, Talogy 30, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 28% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
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
Sapia.ai and Talogy 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 | Sapia.ai | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sapia.ai 52 · Talogy 30
4.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sapia.ai 70 · Talogy 53
3.4 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sapia.ai 50 · Talogy 32
2.2 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sapia.ai 35 · Talogy 25
1.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sapia.ai 62 · Talogy 52
1.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sapia.ai 62 · Talogy 52
1.2 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sapia.ai 62 · Talogy 58
0.3 weighted points to Sapia.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.0 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 +14.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sapia.ai minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Sapia.ai | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 53 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 30 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 32 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 42 (F) | +14 | +14.0 |
§ 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 | Sapia.ai | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sapia.ai last reviewed
- June 7, 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