§ The result
Bullhorn leads Teamtailor by 7 points.
Bullhorn scores 54 and Teamtailor 47 under rubric v1.0 — a 7-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Bullhorn leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Teamtailor leads 3, including Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Bullhorn 58, Teamtailor 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 60% of the weighted advantage Bullhorn holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Bullhorn and Teamtailor are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Sourcing and Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Bullhorn | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 1999 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Bullhorn 58 · Teamtailor 30
5.0 weighted points to Bullhorn
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Bullhorn 62 · Teamtailor 50
2.4 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Bullhorn 35 · Teamtailor 42
0.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Bullhorn 60 · Teamtailor 54
0.7 weighted points to Bullhorn
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Bullhorn 38 · Teamtailor 42
0.6 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Bullhorn 60 · Teamtailor 58
0.3 weighted points to Bullhorn
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Bullhorn 60 · Teamtailor 62
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Bullhorn minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Bullhorn | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 30 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 47 (F) | +7 | +6.9 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Bullhorn has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Bullhorn, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Bullhorn last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor 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