§ The result
1 point separates Dayforce and Ashby.
Within the ATS-integrated cohort, Dayforce edges Ashby by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 57 to 56. Dayforce leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Ashby leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Ashby — Ashby 62, Dayforce 42, on an 18% weight — which is 92% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 2 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
Dayforce
Dayforce is an enterprise human capital management platform whose Dayforce Recruiting module uses AI to assign letter grades to external job applicants, generate job descriptions, and automate screening and hiring workflows alongside HR, payroll, time, talent, and analytics.
§ The record
Ashby and Dayforce are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ashby | Dayforce |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 1992 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Dayforce 42
3.6 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Dayforce 74
2.2 weighted points to Dayforce
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Dayforce 63
0.8 weighted points to Dayforce
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Dayforce 68
0.7 weighted points to Dayforce
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Dayforce 47
0.6 weighted points to Dayforce
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Dayforce 70
0.6 weighted points to Dayforce
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Dayforce 40
0.3 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Dayforce.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Dayforce | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 74 | -11 | -2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 42 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 63 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 68 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 47 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 70 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 57 (F) | -1 | -0.9 |
§ 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 | Dayforce | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Dayforce has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
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 Dayforce, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Dayforce last reviewed
- August 2, 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