§ The result
Bullhorn leads Brainner by 8 points.
Bullhorn scores 54 and Brainner 46 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Bullhorn: Bullhorn is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Brainner on Post-Market Monitoring. The advantage Bullhorn holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Brainner 42, Bullhorn 58, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 34% of the weighted points Bullhorn gains across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Brainner
Brainner is an AI screening layer for applicant tracking systems that scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted criteria with per-criterion justifications, and flags suspected fake applicants using third-party identity and fraud data.
Vendor profile
Bullhorn
Bullhorn is a cloud-based applicant tracking system and CRM for staffing and recruiting agencies, with AI features (Bullhorn Copilot/Amplify, automation, and Textkernel-powered search and match) that source, screen, and rank candidates against jobs.
§ The record
Brainner is filed under Screening AI, Bullhorn under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Brainner | Bullhorn |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2023 | 1999 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brainner 42 · Bullhorn 58
2.9 weighted points to Bullhorn
20% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · Bullhorn 62
2.0 weighted points to Bullhorn
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Brainner 30 · Bullhorn 38
1.2 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brainner 50 · Bullhorn 60
1.2 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brainner 45 · Bullhorn 35
1.2 weighted points to Brainner
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brainner 53 · Bullhorn 60
1.1 weighted points to Bullhorn
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · Bullhorn 60
0.2 weighted points to Bullhorn
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.7 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 -7.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brainner minus Bullhorn.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | Bullhorn | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 58 | -16 | -2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 60 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 35 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 54 (F) | -8 | -7.3 |
§ 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 | Brainner | Bullhorn | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Brainner has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Bullhorn has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Brainner sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Bullhorn, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Bullhorn 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