§ The result
Recruitee leads AmazingHiring by 5 points.
Recruitee scores 42 and AmazingHiring 37 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. Recruitee leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while AmazingHiring leads 1, including FRIA Support. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (AmazingHiring 48, Recruitee 58) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (AmazingHiring 22, Recruitee 30), the second being 25% of the weighted advantage Recruitee 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
Recruitee
Collaborative applicant tracking system, part of the Tellent group, with AI-assisted features for job-description generation, screening candidates against team-defined criteria, resurfacing past applicants, and summarizing evaluation feedback.
§ The record
AmazingHiring is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Recruitee 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 Recruitee is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | AmazingHiring | Recruitee |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2011 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 24% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
AmazingHiring 22 · Recruitee 30
1.4 weighted points to Recruitee
20% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
AmazingHiring 35 · Recruitee 42
1.4 weighted points to Recruitee
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
AmazingHiring 48 · Recruitee 58
1.2 weighted points to Recruitee
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
AmazingHiring 33 · Recruitee 40
0.8 weighted points to Recruitee
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
AmazingHiring 52 · Recruitee 58
0.5 weighted points to Recruitee
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
AmazingHiring 30 · Recruitee 27
0.4 weighted points to AmazingHiring
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
AmazingHiring 50 · Recruitee 52
0.3 weighted points to Recruitee
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.1 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 -5.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is AmazingHiring minus Recruitee.
| Category | Weight | AmazingHiring | Recruitee | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 30 | -8 | -1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 40 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 42 (F) | -5 | -5.2 |
§ 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 | Recruitee | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 14 | 7 | 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; Recruitee has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for AmazingHiring, across 1 distinct source domain, and 21 for Recruitee, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- AmazingHiring last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruitee 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