§ The result
ClearCo (ClearCompany) leads RecruitBot by 9 points.
ClearCo (ClearCompany) scores 46 and RecruitBot 37 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of ClearCo (ClearCompany): ClearCo (ClearCompany) is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and RecruitBot on Post-Market Monitoring. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (ClearCo (ClearCompany) 56, RecruitBot 33) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage ClearCo (ClearCompany) holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
ClearCo (ClearCompany)
ClearCo (formerly ClearCompany) is a unified talent-management suite built around an applicant tracking system. Its AI Talent Match scores and ranks new applicants against a requisition's skills and job titles, and its Sourcing Agent runs AI-conducted phone screening calls and returns applicants ranked by score.
Vendor profile
RecruitBot
RecruitBot is an AI sourcing platform that searches a proprietary database of 655M+ candidate profiles, re-ranks results with machine learning trained on each recruiter's star ratings, and automates personalized email outreach.
§ The record
ClearCo (ClearCompany) is filed under ATS-integrated AI, RecruitBot under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only ClearCo (ClearCompany) is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | RecruitBot |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2004 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 56 · RecruitBot 33
4.6 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 63 · RecruitBot 50
1.6 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 57 · RecruitBot 48
1.3 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
18% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 28 · RecruitBot 22
1.1 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 30 · RecruitBot 27
0.4 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 60 · RecruitBot 55
0.4 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 37 · RecruitBot 40
0.4 weighted points to RecruitBot
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ClearCo (ClearCompany) minus RecruitBot.
| Category | Weight | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | RecruitBot | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 56 | 33 | +23 | +4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 22 | +6 | +1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 48 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 50 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 37 | 40 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 37 (F) | +9 | +9.1 |
§ 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 | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | RecruitBot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | — |
| 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
ClearCo (ClearCompany) has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; RecruitBot has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ClearCo (ClearCompany) and RecruitBot sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for ClearCo (ClearCompany), across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for RecruitBot, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ClearCo (ClearCompany) last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- RecruitBot 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