§ The result
Brainner leads Pin on 4 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Brainner, filed under Screening, finishes on 46 and Pin, filed under Sourcing, on 40, 6 points apart. Pin is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Brainner takes 4, the remaining 3 are level, and the nearest of those 4 is Data Governance Disclosure, Brainner 53 to Pin 50. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Brainner 52, Pin 30 — and at a 20% weight it carries 69% of the weighted advantage Brainner holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
§ The record
Brainner is filed under Screening AI, Pin under Candidate sourcing 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.
| Record | Brainner | Pin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2023 | 2024 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · Pin 30
4.4 weighted points to Brainner
18% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brainner 42 · Pin 35
1.3 weighted points to Brainner
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brainner 53 · Pin 50
0.4 weighted points to Brainner
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · Pin 55
0.2 weighted points to Brainner
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to +6.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brainner minus Pin.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | Pin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 30 | +22 | +4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 50 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 45 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 40 (F) | +6 | +6.4 |
§ 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 | Brainner | Pin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 32 | 5 | 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; Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 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 74 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pin 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