§ The result
Ashby leads Avature on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Ashby scores 56 and Avature 48 under rubric v1.0 — an 8-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Ashby leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Avature is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Ashby leads is Human Oversight Design, Ashby 62 to Avature 60. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Ashby 62, Avature 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 51% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
Vendor profile
Avature
Avature is an enterprise talent acquisition and talent management platform (recruiting CRM, ATS, onboarding and internal mobility) with built-in AI for semantic search, explainable weighted candidate matching and ranking, candidate fraud detection and configurable recruiting agents.
§ The record
Ashby and Avature are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Sourcing and Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ashby | Avature |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2004 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Avature 40
4.0 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Avature 55
1.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Avature 32
1.5 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Avature 60
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Avature 40
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Avature 60
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 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 Ashby minus Avature.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Avature | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 55 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 32 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 48 (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 | Ashby | Avature | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Avature has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Avature sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Avature, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Avature 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