§ The result
Sense leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Sense finishes 16 points clear of Talogy under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 42 — across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Sense leads every one of the 7 criteria, Talogy none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Sense 62 to Talogy 58. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Sense 72, Talogy 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 47% of the weighted advantage Sense holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
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
Sense is filed under Screening AI, Talogy under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Talogy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Sense | Talogy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2016 | 1946 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sense 72 · Talogy 30
7.6 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sense 52 · Talogy 32
2.4 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sense 38 · Talogy 25
1.9 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sense 64 · Talogy 52
1.4 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sense 60 · Talogy 53
1.4 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sense 58 · Talogy 52
0.9 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sense 62 · Talogy 58
0.3 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +16.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +16.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sense minus Talogy.
| Category | Weight | Sense | Talogy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 53 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 72 | 30 | +42 | +7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 25 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 52 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 32 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 42 (F) | +16 | +16.0 |
§ 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 | Sense | Talogy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 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 Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains, and 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sense 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