HomeCompareCovey vs Recruitee

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Covey vs Recruitee

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Covey takes the total, Recruitee takes more of the criteria.

Covey scores 47 and Recruitee 42 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. Recruitee leads more of the criteria than Covey — 4 to 1 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Covey leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Covey. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Covey 72, Recruitee 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage Covey holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.

§ The record

Covey is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Recruitee under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.

RecordCoveyRecruitee
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSNL
Founded20182015

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 74% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Covey 72 · Recruitee 30

    7.6 weighted points to Covey

  2. 12% weight · 86% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Covey 30 · Recruitee 40

    1.2 weighted points to Recruitee

  3. 12% weight · 93% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Covey 52 · Recruitee 58

    0.7 weighted points to Recruitee

  4. 20% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Covey 40 · Recruitee 42

    0.4 weighted points to Recruitee

  5. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Covey 25 · Recruitee 27

    0.3 weighted points to Recruitee

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +4.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.2 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 +4.9.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Covey minus Recruitee.

CategoryWeightCoveyRecruiteeΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4042-2-0.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%7230+42+7.6
FRIA Support15%2527-2-0.3
Data Governance Disclosure15%5252--
Human Oversight Design12%5258-6-0.7
Post-Market Monitoring12%3040-10-1.2
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%47 (F)42 (F)+5+4.9

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCoveyRecruitee
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%20Audit reportSources on a separate domain11
FRIA Support15%0111Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%0131Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%0121Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%20Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%65Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain147Sources on the vendor's own domain

Covey has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Recruitee has 21 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Covey sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 32 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 11 for Covey, across 2 distinct source domains, and 21 for Recruitee, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Covey last reviewed
June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Recruitee 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.