§ The result
Ashby leads Interviewer.AI by 9 points.
Ashby scores 56 and Interviewer.AI 47 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. Ashby leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Interviewer.AI leads 1, including Data Governance Disclosure. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ashby 62, Interviewer.AI 35 — and at an 18% weight it carries 49% 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
Interviewer.AI
Interviewer.AI is an asynchronous AI video interview platform that pre-screens and scores candidates by analyzing recorded video responses and resumes against role-specific success factors, producing an "AI Score" breakdown to help recruiters shortlist.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Interviewer.AI under Video interview 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 Interviewer.AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | Interviewer.AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SG |
| Founded | 2018 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Interviewer.AI 35
4.9 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Interviewer.AI 52
2.2 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Interviewer.AI 32
1.2 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Interviewer.AI 35
1.1 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Interviewer.AI 58
0.4 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Interviewer.AI 60
0.3 weighted points to Interviewer.AI
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Interviewer.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 +9.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Interviewer.AI.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Interviewer.AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 52 | +11 | +2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 35 | +27 | +4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 32 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 47 (F) | +9 | +9.6 |
§ 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 | Interviewer.AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Interviewer.AI has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for Interviewer.AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Interviewer.AI 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