§ The result
AmazingHiring and Fetcher tie at 37.
AmazingHiring and Fetcher tie at 37 under rubric v1.0 inside the Sourcing cohort, arriving there from different criteria. AmazingHiring leads 2 of the 7 criteria and Fetcher 5, yet the two totals land on the same number. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — AmazingHiring 35, Fetcher 27 — and at a 20% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage AmazingHiring holds across the 2 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
Fetcher
AI-powered candidate sourcing and outbound recruiting platform that automates passive and active talent sourcing, personalized email outreach, and inbound applicant screening for corporate recruiting teams.
§ The record
AmazingHiring and Fetcher are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Fetcher is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Fetcher |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Fetcher 27
1.6 weighted points to AmazingHiring
18% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Fetcher 28
1.1 weighted points to Fetcher
15% weight · 67% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Fetcher 25
0.8 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Fetcher 55
0.8 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Fetcher 52
0.5 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Fetcher 35
0.2 weighted points to Fetcher
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Fetcher 55
0.2 weighted points to Fetcher
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Fetcher.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Fetcher | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 28 | -6 | -1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 52 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 35 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 37 (F) | - | -0.4 |
§ 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 | Fetcher | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 0 | 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 | 2 | 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 | 13 | 6 | 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; Fetcher has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for Fetcher, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Fetcher 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