§ The result
Teamtailor leads Talogy by 5 points.
Teamtailor scores 47 and Talogy 42 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Teamtailor leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including FRIA Support, while Talogy leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. FRIA Support is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Talogy 25, Teamtailor 42 — and at a 15% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
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
Talogy 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 Talogy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Talogy | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 1946 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 44% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Talogy 25 · Teamtailor 42
2.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Talogy 32 · Teamtailor 42
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Talogy 52 · Teamtailor 58
0.9 weighted points to Teamtailor
20% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Talogy 53 · Teamtailor 50
0.6 weighted points to Talogy
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Talogy 58 · Teamtailor 62
0.3 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Talogy 52 · Teamtailor 54
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -4.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Talogy minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Talogy | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 47 (F) | -5 | -4.6 |
§ 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 | Talogy | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 2 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Talogy last reviewed
- August 2, 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.
§ Where next