§ The result
iMocha leads AmazingHiring on all 7 criteria.
iMocha finishes 19 points clear of AmazingHiring under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 37 — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. iMocha leads every one of the 7 criteria, AmazingHiring none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, AmazingHiring 30 to iMocha 38. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (AmazingHiring 35, iMocha 68, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage iMocha 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
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, iMocha 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 iMocha is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | iMocha |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2011 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · iMocha 68
6.6 weighted points to iMocha
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · iMocha 44
4.0 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · iMocha 66
2.4 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · iMocha 64
1.9 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · iMocha 48
1.8 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · iMocha 38
1.2 weighted points to iMocha
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · iMocha 66
1.1 weighted points to iMocha
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -19.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -19 beside that -19.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus iMocha.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | iMocha | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 68 | -33 | -6.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 44 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 66 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 64 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 48 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 66 | -14 | -1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 56 (F) | -19 | -19.0 |
§ 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 | iMocha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 5 | 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; iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iMocha 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