§ The result
Paylocity leads AmazingHiring on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Paylocity scores 43 and AmazingHiring 37 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. Paylocity leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so AmazingHiring is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Paylocity leads is Human Oversight Design, AmazingHiring 48 to Paylocity 50. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (AmazingHiring 22, Paylocity 33, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 32% of the weighted advantage Paylocity holds across the 6 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
Paylocity
Paylocity is a cloud-based HCM and payroll platform whose talent suite includes an applicant tracking system with generative-AI job-description and invite drafting, one-way video interviews, candidate self-scheduling, and a conversational "AI Assistant."
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Paylocity 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. Only Paylocity is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Paylocity |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Paylocity 33
2.0 weighted points to Paylocity
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Paylocity 44
1.8 weighted points to Paylocity
12% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Paylocity 42
1.1 weighted points to Paylocity
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Paylocity 54
0.6 weighted points to Paylocity
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Paylocity 58
0.5 weighted points to Paylocity
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Paylocity 50
0.2 weighted points to Paylocity
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Paylocity.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Paylocity | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 44 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 33 | -11 | -2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 50 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 42 | -9 | -1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 43 (F) | -6 | -6.2 |
§ 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 | Paylocity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | 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 | 11 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
AmazingHiring has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Paylocity has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 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 Paylocity, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paylocity 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