§ The result
Ashby leads VidCruiter on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Ashby scores 56 and VidCruiter 48 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. Ashby leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so VidCruiter is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Ashby leads is Data Governance Disclosure, Ashby 58 to VidCruiter 56. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ashby 62, VidCruiter 38 — and at an 18% weight it carries 51% 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
VidCruiter
VidCruiter is an enterprise recruitment platform combining live and pre-recorded video interviewing, structured interview workflows, automated scheduling, skills testing, automated reference checks, and AI features such as transcript-based AI Interview Scoring, AI Interview Notes, and AI fraud detection.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, VidCruiter under Video interview AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only VidCruiter is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | VidCruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | CA |
| Founded | 2018 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · VidCruiter 38
4.3 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · VidCruiter 32
1.5 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · VidCruiter 33
1.1 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · VidCruiter 58
1.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · VidCruiter 56
0.3 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · VidCruiter 60
0.2 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +8.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.4 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 +8.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus VidCruiter.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | VidCruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 58 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 38 | +24 | +4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 32 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 33 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 60 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 48 (F) | +8 | +8.4 |
§ 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 | VidCruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 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 | — |
| 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 | 12 | 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; VidCruiter has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 18 for VidCruiter, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- VidCruiter 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