§ The result
3 points separate AmazingHiring and HireLogic.
AmazingHiring holds a 3-point edge over HireLogic under rubric v1.0, 37 to 34, across the Sourcing and Video interview cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 1 in favour of AmazingHiring, with 1 level: AmazingHiring is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HireLogic on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to HireLogic — AmazingHiring 35, HireLogic 42, on a 20% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage HireLogic holds across the 1 criterion 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
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, HireLogic under Video interview AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only HireLogic is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | HireLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · HireLogic 42
1.4 weighted points to HireLogic
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · HireLogic 15
1.3 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · HireLogic 25
0.8 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · HireLogic 45
0.8 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · HireLogic 28
0.6 weighted points to AmazingHiring
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · HireLogic 45
0.6 weighted points to AmazingHiring
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +2.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus HireLogic.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | HireLogic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 15 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 48 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 28 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 34 (F) | +3 | +2.5 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 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; HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireLogic 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