§ The result
Rippling leads Brainner on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Rippling, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 10 points above Brainner, filed under Screening: 56 against 46 under rubric v1.0. Brainner is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Rippling takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Post-Market Monitoring, Brainner 45 to Rippling 47. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Brainner 52, Rippling 73 — and at a 20% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Rippling holds across the 6 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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
Brainner is filed under Screening AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Brainner is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Brainner | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2023 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brainner 52 · Rippling 73
4.2 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Brainner 30 · Rippling 45
2.3 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brainner 53 · Rippling 64
1.6 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brainner 50 · Rippling 60
1.2 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brainner 58 · Rippling 64
0.5 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brainner 45 · Rippling 47
0.2 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -10.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brainner minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | Brainner | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 73 | -21 | -4.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 45 | -15 | -2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 64 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 47 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 56 (F) | -10 | -10.0 |
§ 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 | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 1 | 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; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; 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 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Brainner, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brainner last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling last reviewed
- July 17, 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