§ The result
Ashby and iMocha tie at 56.
Ashby (ATS-integrated) and iMocha (Assessment) tie at 56 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Ashby leads 2 of the 7 criteria and iMocha 5, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ashby 62, iMocha 44 — and at an 18% weight it carries 84% 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
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, iMocha 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 iMocha is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | iMocha |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2018 | 2015 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · iMocha 44
3.2 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · iMocha 66
1.2 weighted points to iMocha
20% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · iMocha 68
1.0 weighted points to iMocha
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · iMocha 48
0.7 weighted points to iMocha
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · iMocha 38
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · iMocha 64
0.2 weighted points to iMocha
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · iMocha 66
0.2 weighted points to iMocha
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that +0.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus iMocha.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | iMocha | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 68 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 44 | +18 | +3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 66 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 64 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 48 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 66 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 56 (F) | - | +0.4 |
§ 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 | iMocha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 21 | 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; iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iMocha last reviewed
- July 17, 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