HomeCompareCriteria vs Hireology

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Criteria vs Hireology

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

4 points separate Hireology and Criteria.

Hireology (ATS-integrated) edges Criteria (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 57 to 53. Hireology leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Criteria leads 3, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Criteria 48, Hireology 83) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 71% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 4 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Hireology under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Criteria is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCriteriaHireology
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20062010

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 44% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Criteria 48 · Hireology 83

    6.3 weighted points to Hireology

  2. 20% weight · 70% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Criteria 68 · Hireology 50

    3.6 weighted points to Criteria

  3. 12% weight · 84% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Criteria 42 · Hireology 59

    2.0 weighted points to Hireology

  4. 15% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Criteria 62 · Hireology 52

    1.5 weighted points to Criteria

  5. 15% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Criteria 32 · Hireology 35

    0.4 weighted points to Hireology

  6. 8% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Criteria 60 · Hireology 58

    0.2 weighted points to Criteria

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Criteria 56 · Hireology 57

    0.1 weighted points to Hireology

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 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 -3.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Criteria minus Hireology.

CategoryWeightCriteriaHireologyΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%6850+18+3.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%4883-35-6.3
FRIA Support15%3235-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%6252+10+1.5
Human Oversight Design12%5657-1-0.1
Post-Market Monitoring12%4259-17-2.0
Customer Documentation8%6058+2+0.2
Total100%53 (F)57 (F)-4-3.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCriteriaHireology
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%11—40Audit reportSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%30Sources on the vendor's own domain40Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%20Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%30Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%144Sources on the vendor's own domain254Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Criteria last reviewed
June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Hireology 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.