§ The result
4 points separate Ashby and Glider AI.
Ashby (ATS-integrated) edges Glider AI (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 56 to 52. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Ashby: Ashby is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Glider AI on Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Ashby 63, Glider AI 52) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 43% 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
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Glider AI under Assessment 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. Only Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Glider AI 52
2.2 weighted points to Ashby
18% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Glider AI 68
1.1 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Glider AI 35
1.1 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Glider AI 55
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Glider AI 54
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Glider AI 40
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Glider AI 60
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 68 | -6 | -1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 52 (F) | +4 | +4.1 |
§ 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 | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 6 | 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; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Glider AI 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