§ The result
Ashby leads Oleeo on all 7 criteria.
Ashby finishes 16 points clear of Oleeo inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 56 against 40. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria, Oleeo none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Ashby 62 to Oleeo 55. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Ashby 63, Oleeo 40, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
§ The record
Ashby and Oleeo are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Ashby | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 1995 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Oleeo 40
4.6 weighted points to Ashby
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Oleeo 40
4.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Oleeo 25
2.5 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Oleeo 45
1.9 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Oleeo 30
1.4 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Oleeo 55
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Oleeo 55
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +16.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +16.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Oleeo.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 40 | +23 | +4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 55 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 40 (F) | +16 | +16.0 |
§ 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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 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 | 10 | 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; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo 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