§ The result
Xobin leads Talogy on all 7 criteria.
Xobin finishes 8 points ahead of Talogy under rubric v1.0, 50 to 42, both scored as Assessment entries. Xobin takes all 7 criteria from Talogy without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Customer Documentation, Talogy 58 to Xobin 60. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Talogy 30, Xobin 43, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage Xobin holds across the 7 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
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
§ The record
Talogy and Xobin 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 | Talogy | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 1946 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Talogy 30 · Xobin 43
2.3 weighted points to Xobin
20% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Talogy 53 · Xobin 62
1.8 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Talogy 25 · Xobin 35
1.5 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Talogy 52 · Xobin 57
0.8 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Talogy 52 · Xobin 58
0.7 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Talogy 32 · Xobin 38
0.7 weighted points to Xobin
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Talogy 58 · Xobin 60
0.2 weighted points to Xobin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Talogy minus Xobin.
| Category | Weight | Talogy | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 53 | 62 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 43 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 50 (F) | -8 | -8.0 |
§ 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 | Talogy | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 22 | 9 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Talogy has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 22 with a source URL, 9 documented absences; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Talogy, across 1 distinct source domain, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Talogy last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin last reviewed
- September 25, 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