§ The result
Ashby leads Intervue.io on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 25 points between Ashby (ATS-integrated) and Intervue.io (Video interview): 56 for Ashby, 31 for Intervue.io. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Intervue.io leads none. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Ashby 62, Intervue.io 12, 18% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage Ashby builds across the 7 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
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Intervue.io 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 Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | Intervue.io |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2018 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Intervue.io 12
9.0 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Intervue.io 28
7.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Intervue.io 22
3.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Intervue.io 38
3.0 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Intervue.io 30
1.4 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Intervue.io 50
1.0 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Intervue.io 54
1.0 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +25.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +25 beside that +25.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Intervue.io.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Intervue.io | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 28 | +35 | +7.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 12 | +50 | +9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 22 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 38 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 50 | +13 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 31 (F) | +25 | +25.4 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 7 | Sources 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; Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Intervue.io 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