§ The result
Ashby leads JazzHR on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Ashby sits 12 points above JazzHR under rubric v1.0, 56 against 44, with both filed under ATS-integrated. Ashby leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so JazzHR is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Ashby leads is Human Oversight Design, Ashby 62 to JazzHR 58. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ashby 62, JazzHR 35, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 39% 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
JazzHR
JazzHR is a small-business applicant tracking system that manages job posting, applications and hiring workflows, and layers on AI "Talent Fit" scoring that ranks candidates against a job description plus automated knockout screening questions.
§ The record
Ashby and JazzHR are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Sourcing and Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Ashby | JazzHR |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2009 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · JazzHR 35
4.9 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · JazzHR 45
3.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · JazzHR 28
2.1 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · JazzHR 52
0.9 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · JazzHR 56
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · JazzHR 58
0.5 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +12.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus JazzHR.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | JazzHR | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 45 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 35 | +27 | +4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 28 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 56 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 44 (F) | +12 | +12.5 |
§ 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 | JazzHR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 17 | 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; JazzHR has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for JazzHR sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 24 for JazzHR, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- JazzHR last reviewed
- August 2, 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