§ The result
Glider AI leads AmazingHiring on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Glider AI (Assessment) opens a 15-point lead on AmazingHiring (Sourcing), 52 to 37. Glider AI leads every one of the 7 criteria, AmazingHiring none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, AmazingHiring 50 to Glider AI 54. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — AmazingHiring 22, Glider AI 68 — and at an 18% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage Glider AI 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
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Glider AI 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 Glider AI is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Glider AI 68
8.3 weighted points to Glider AI
20% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Glider AI 52
3.4 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Glider AI 55
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Glider AI 40
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Glider AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Glider AI 60
0.6 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Glider AI 54
0.6 weighted points to Glider AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -15.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -15.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 52 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 68 | -46 | -8.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 40 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 52 (F) | -15 | -15.3 |
§ 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 | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 6 | Audit reportSources 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; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Glider AI 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