§ The result
Humanly leads AmazingHiring by 5 points.
Humanly scores 42 and AmazingHiring 37 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. Humanly leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while AmazingHiring leads 2, including Data Governance Disclosure, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — AmazingHiring 22, Humanly 40 — and at an 18% weight it carries 45% of the weighted advantage Humanly holds across the 4 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
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Humanly 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 Humanly is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Humanly |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Humanly 40
3.2 weighted points to Humanly
20% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Humanly 45
2.0 weighted points to Humanly
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Humanly 40
1.5 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Humanly 58
1.2 weighted points to Humanly
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Humanly 35
0.8 weighted points to Humanly
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Humanly 30
0.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -5.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Humanly.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Humanly | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 45 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 40 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 30 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 42 (F) | -5 | -5.3 |
§ 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 | Humanly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 0 | 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 | 12 | 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; Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 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 Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Humanly last reviewed
- June 7, 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