§ The result
Criteria leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Criteria finishes 23 points clear of Moonhub under rubric v1.0 — 53 against 30 — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. Criteria leads every one of the 7 criteria and 5 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Moonhub leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Criteria 68, Moonhub 30, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
Vendor profile
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing 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.
| Record | Criteria | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2006 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Moonhub 30
7.6 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Moonhub 18
5.4 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Moonhub 40
3.3 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · Moonhub 22
2.4 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · Moonhub 38
1.8 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Moonhub 25
1.1 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Moonhub 48
1.0 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +22.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 22.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +23 beside that +22.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 30 | +38 | +7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 18 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +3.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 48 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 22 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 38 | +22 | +1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 30 (F) | +23 | +22.5 |
§ 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 | Criteria | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 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