§ The result
Classet leads Jack & Jill by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Classet, filed under Screening, finishes on 55 and Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing, on 49, 6 points apart. Jack & Jill takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Classet, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Classet 76, Jack & Jill 62, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage Classet holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Classet
Classet's AI voice recruiter, Joy, phones hourly and frontline applicants within about a minute of applying, runs employer-scripted screening interviews with binary knockout questions, and sends recruiters recordings, transcripts, summaries and a qualified/unqualified outcome, either in Classet's lightweight ATS or in 100+ connected ATSs.
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
Classet is filed under Screening AI, Jack & Jill 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 | Classet | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2021 | 2025 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Classet 76 · Jack & Jill 62
2.5 weighted points to Classet
15% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Classet 57 · Jack & Jill 48
1.3 weighted points to Classet
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Classet 58 · Jack & Jill 48
1.2 weighted points to Classet
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Classet 33 · Jack & Jill 28
0.8 weighted points to Classet
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Classet 62 · Jack & Jill 56
0.5 weighted points to Classet
20% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Classet 46 · Jack & Jill 44
0.4 weighted points to Classet
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Classet 55 · Jack & Jill 58
0.4 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 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 +6.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Classet minus Jack & Jill.
| Category | Weight | Classet | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 46 | 44 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 76 | 62 | +14 | +2.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 28 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 48 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 56 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 49 (F) | +6 | +6.3 |
§ 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 | Classet | Jack & Jill | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Classet has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 5 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 Classet and Jack & Jill 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: 38 for Classet, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Classet last reviewed
- September 25, 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