§ The result
Ashby leads Paycor on all 7 criteria.
The ATS-integrated cohort pairing of Ashby and Paycor comes out 56 to 40 under rubric v1.0, a 16-point lead for Ashby. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria, Paycor none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Ashby 42 to Paycor 38. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Ashby 62, Paycor 25) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 40% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds 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
Paycor
Paycor, a Paychex company, sells a mid-market HR and payroll suite whose recruiting tools include the Paycor Recruiting ATS, Paycor Smart Sourcing (formerly Talenya), which uses AI to build a prioritized list of passive and active candidates for each role and automate outreach, and a WISE assistant that phone-screens candidates and scores their answers.
§ The record
Ashby and Paycor 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 | Paycor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 1990 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Paycor 25
6.7 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Paycor 40
4.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Paycor 27
2.3 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Paycor 50
1.2 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Paycor 55
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Paycor 55
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Paycor 38
0.5 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +16.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.7 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 +16.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Paycor.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Paycor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 40 | +23 | +4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 25 | +37 | +6.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 27 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 55 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 40 (F) | +16 | +16.7 |
§ 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 | Paycor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 6 | 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; Paycor has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Paycor sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 30 for Paycor, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paycor 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