§ The result
Ashby leads Brainner by 10 points.
Ashby, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 10 points above Brainner, filed under Screening: 56 against 46 under rubric v1.0. Ashby leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Brainner leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ashby 62, Brainner 42, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Brainner
Brainner is an AI screening layer for applicant tracking systems that scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted criteria with per-criterion justifications, and flags suspected fake applicants using third-party identity and fraud data.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Brainner under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ashby | Brainner |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2023 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Brainner 42
3.6 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Brainner 52
2.2 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Brainner 30
1.8 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Brainner 50
1.4 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Brainner 53
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Brainner 58
0.4 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Brainner 45
0.4 weighted points to Brainner
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Brainner.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Brainner | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 42 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 53 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 46 (F) | +10 | +9.8 |
§ 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 | Brainner | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 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 | 33 | 4 | 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; Brainner has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Brainner sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Brainner 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