§ The result
AmazingHiring leads JobDiva on all 7 criteria.
AmazingHiring scores 37 and JobDiva 29 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. AmazingHiring is ahead of JobDiva on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Post-Market Monitoring at AmazingHiring 33 to JobDiva 30. Even Data Governance Disclosure, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (AmazingHiring 50, JobDiva 38, 15% weight), is only 23% of the weighted advantage AmazingHiring builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
JobDiva
JobDiva is an all-in-one ATS, CRM, onboarding, back-office and VMS-synchronization platform for staffing agencies, with AI features including DivaMatch candidate-to-job scoring, AI-enhanced matching and semantic search, resume harvesting and generative outreach.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, JobDiva under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144.
| Record | AmazingHiring | JobDiva |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 2003 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · JobDiva 38
1.8 weighted points to AmazingHiring
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · JobDiva 28
1.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · JobDiva 15
1.3 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · JobDiva 22
1.2 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · JobDiva 40
1.0 weighted points to AmazingHiring
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · JobDiva 42
0.8 weighted points to AmazingHiring
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · JobDiva 30
0.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +7.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus JobDiva.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | JobDiva | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 15 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 22 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 40 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 30 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 29 (F) | +8 | +7.8 |
§ 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 | JobDiva | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | — | 3 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 20 | 8 | 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; JobDiva has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for JobDiva, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- JobDiva 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