§ The result
Bullhorn leads Jack & Jill by 5 points.
Bullhorn scores 54 and Jack & Jill 49 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. Bullhorn leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Jack & Jill leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Bullhorn 62, Jack & Jill 44) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 48% of the weighted advantage Bullhorn holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Jack & Jill
Jack & Jill is a London AI recruiting marketplace. Its free career agent, Jack, interviews and profiles candidates, and its employer-side AI recruiter, Jill, turns a role brief into a scoring rubric, ranks candidates from Jack's network (and optionally public profiles) with a percentage match, and arranges introductions only when both sides agree.
§ The record
Bullhorn is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Jack & Jill under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Bullhorn | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1999 | 2025 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Bullhorn 62 · Jack & Jill 44
3.6 weighted points to Bullhorn
15% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Bullhorn 60 · Jack & Jill 48
1.8 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Bullhorn 35 · Jack & Jill 48
1.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Bullhorn 38 · Jack & Jill 28
1.5 weighted points to Bullhorn
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Bullhorn 58 · Jack & Jill 62
0.7 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Bullhorn 60 · Jack & Jill 56
0.3 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Bullhorn 60 · Jack & Jill 58
0.2 weighted points to Bullhorn
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.2 — 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 +5 beside that +5.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Bullhorn minus Jack & Jill.
| Category | Weight | Bullhorn | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 44 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 28 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 48 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 49 (F) | +5 | +5.2 |
§ 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 | Bullhorn | Jack & Jill | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Bullhorn has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Bullhorn, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Bullhorn last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Jack & Jill 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