§ The result
Glider AI leads Darwinbox by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Glider AI, filed under Assessment, finishes on 52 and Darwinbox, filed under ATS-integrated, on 46, 6 points apart. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of Glider AI, with 1 level: Glider AI is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Darwinbox on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Darwinbox 28, Glider AI 68 — and at an 18% weight it carries 82% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
Vendor profile
Glider AI
Glider AI is a skills-validation platform that screens and verifies candidates with auto-scored skills assessments and coding simulations, autonomous AI video and voice interviews that score responses against job requirements, live coding interviews, AI proctoring, and biometric ID verification.
§ The record
Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Glider AI under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Darwinbox | Glider AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · Glider AI 68
7.2 weighted points to Glider AI
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · Glider AI 52
1.6 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · Glider AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Glider AI
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · Glider AI 54
0.6 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · Glider AI 40
0.6 weighted points to Glider AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · Glider AI 60
0.2 weighted points to Glider AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -6.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -6.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus Glider AI.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | Glider AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 68 | -40 | -7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 52 (F) | -6 | -6.6 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Darwinbox | Glider AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 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% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 64 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Glider AI 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