§ The result
Jack & Jill takes the total, Clevry takes more of the criteria.
Jack & Jill holds a 4-point edge over Clevry under rubric v1.0, 49 to 45, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Clevry leads more of the criteria, 4 against 2 for Jack & Jill, yet Jack & Jill takes Bias Audit Transparency, which carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Clevry 38, Jack & Jill 62 — and at an 18% weight it carries 67% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Clevry
Clevry is a UK psychometric assessment platform offering norm-referenced personality questionnaires, cognitive ability tests and situational judgement tests, plus recorded one-way video interviews, an interview builder, a skills-first ATS and an AI tool that maps job ads onto its personality scale library.
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
Clevry is filed under Assessment AI, Jack & Jill under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Clevry is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Clevry | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 1991 | 2025 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Clevry 38 · Jack & Jill 62
4.3 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Clevry 30 · Jack & Jill 48
2.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Clevry 52 · Jack & Jill 44
1.6 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Clevry 55 · Jack & Jill 48
1.1 weighted points to Clevry
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Clevry 60 · Jack & Jill 56
0.3 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Clevry 30 · Jack & Jill 28
0.3 weighted points to Clevry
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.2 — 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 -4 beside that -3.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Clevry minus Jack & Jill.
| Category | Weight | Clevry | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 44 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 62 | -24 | -4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 49 (F) | -4 | -3.2 |
§ 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 | Clevry | Jack & Jill | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 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% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 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% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 39 | 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 |
Clevry has 44 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 39 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 Clevry and Jack & Jill sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 80 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 44 for Clevry, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Clevry 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