§ The result
Findem takes the total, Ashby takes more of the criteria.
Findem (Sourcing) edges Ashby (ATS-integrated) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 58 to 56. Ashby leads more of the criteria than Findem — 5 to 1 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Findem leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Findem. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ashby 62, Findem 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 1 criterion 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
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Findem under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Scheduling and Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ashby | Findem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Findem 83
3.8 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Findem 58
1.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Findem 38
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Findem 58
0.4 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Findem 60
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Findem 57
0.1 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.4 — 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 -2 beside that -1.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Findem.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Findem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 83 | -21 | -3.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 58 (F) | -2 | -1.4 |
§ 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 | Findem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources 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; Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Findem last reviewed
- June 7, 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