§ The result
Ashby leads AmazingHiring on all 7 criteria.
Ashby finishes 19 points clear of AmazingHiring under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 37 — across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria, AmazingHiring none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, AmazingHiring 50 to Ashby 58. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (AmazingHiring 22, Ashby 62, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
AmazingHiring
A technical-talent sourcing platform that aggregates public developer profiles from 50+ networks (GitHub, Stack Overflow, Kaggle, LinkedIn) and uses AI to rank and surface candidates for recruiters, with verified-contact retrieval and outreach automation.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Ashby under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Ashby is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Ashby |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Ashby 62
7.2 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Ashby 63
5.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Ashby 42
1.8 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Ashby 62
1.7 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Ashby 58
1.2 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Ashby 42
1.1 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Ashby 63
0.9 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -19.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -19.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Ashby.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Ashby | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 63 | -28 | -5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 62 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 42 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 63 | -11 | -0.9 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 56 (F) | -19 | -19.4 |
§ 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 | AmazingHiring | Ashby | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 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