§ The result
PageUp leads Ashby by 8 points.
PageUp finishes 8 points ahead of Ashby under rubric v1.0, 64 (D) to 56 (F), both scored as ATS-integrated entries. Ashby takes 1 of the 7 criteria, FRIA Support among them, against 5 for PageUp, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Ashby 62, PageUp 80) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage PageUp holds across the 5 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
PageUp
PageUp is an enterprise talent acquisition suite (ATS, recruitment marketing/CRM, onboarding, learning and performance). Its AI Skills Matching sorts each applicant's resume against skills taken from the job ad into five bands, from Excellent Match to Not a Match, and recruiters reach those results through Paige, its conversational assistant.
§ The record
Ashby and PageUp 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 | PageUp |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2018 | 1997 |
§ 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 · PageUp 80
3.2 weighted points to PageUp
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · PageUp 74
2.2 weighted points to PageUp
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · PageUp 55
1.6 weighted points to PageUp
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · PageUp 63
0.8 weighted points to PageUp
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · PageUp 40
0.3 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · PageUp 64
0.2 weighted points to PageUp
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -7.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus PageUp.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | PageUp | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 74 | -11 | -2.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 80 | -18 | -3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 63 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 64 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 63 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 64 (D) | -8 | -7.7 |
§ 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 | PageUp | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 4 | 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; PageUp has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for PageUp sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for PageUp, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- PageUp 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