§ The result
2 points separate Canditech and AmazingHiring.
Canditech (Assessment) edges AmazingHiring (Sourcing) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 39 to 37. Canditech leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Human Oversight Design, while AmazingHiring leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (AmazingHiring 52, Canditech 58) and Human Oversight Design at 12% (AmazingHiring 48, Canditech 53), the second being 26% of the weighted advantage Canditech holds across the 5 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
Canditech
Canditech is a skills-assessment and job-simulation platform that screens candidates with work-sample tests, technical and soft-skill assessments, and one-way video interviews, using AI agents to auto-score open-text and video responses.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Canditech under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Canditech is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Canditech |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IL |
| Founded | 2011 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Canditech 53
0.6 weighted points to Canditech
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Canditech 25
0.5 weighted points to Canditech
8% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Canditech 58
0.5 weighted points to Canditech
20% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Canditech 37
0.4 weighted points to Canditech
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Canditech 52
0.3 weighted points to Canditech
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Canditech 32
0.1 weighted points to AmazingHiring
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 2.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Canditech.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Canditech | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 37 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 53 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 32 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 39 (F) | -2 | -2.2 |
§ 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 | Canditech | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Canditech has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Canditech, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Canditech 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