§ The result
Crosschq leads AmazingHiring on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Crosschq, filed under Screening, comes out 10 points above AmazingHiring, filed under Sourcing: 47 against 37 under rubric v1.0. AmazingHiring is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Crosschq takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Post-Market Monitoring, AmazingHiring 33 to Crosschq 40. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (AmazingHiring 22, Crosschq 38) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (AmazingHiring 35, Crosschq 50), the second being 29% of the weighted advantage Crosschq holds across the 6 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
Crosschq
Crosschq is a hiring-intelligence platform that combines automated 360 reference checks, an AI Interview Agent that conducts and scores voice/video screening interviews, AI resume matching and ranking, candidate-fraud and identity checks, Traitify personality and cognitive assessments, and quality-of-hire analytics.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Crosschq under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Crosschq is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Crosschq |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Crosschq 50
3.0 weighted points to Crosschq
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Crosschq 38
2.9 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Crosschq 62
1.7 weighted points to Crosschq
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Crosschq 58
1.2 weighted points to Crosschq
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Crosschq 40
0.8 weighted points to Crosschq
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Crosschq 62
0.8 weighted points to Crosschq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -10.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Crosschq.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Crosschq | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 50 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 38 | -16 | -2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 40 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 47 (F) | -10 | -10.4 |
§ 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 | Crosschq | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 6 | 1 | Sources 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 | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 38 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Crosschq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Crosschq 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