Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Darwinbox vs HiBob
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.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
HiBob
HiBob's Bob is an all-in-one HR platform whose Bob Hiring applicant tracking module uses AI to give each application an explainable match score against recruiter-defined criteria (AI CV Matching) and to draft job descriptions, interview scorecards and candidate emails.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Darwinbox and HiBob tie at 46.
Darwinbox and HiBob, both in the ATS-integrated cohort, tie at 46 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Darwinbox leads 3 of the 7 criteria and HiBob 4, yet the two totals land on the same number. Darwinbox takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Darwinbox 28, HiBob 20), which is 56% of the weighted advantage Darwinbox holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Post-Market Monitoring, Darwinbox 35 to HiBob 47.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Darwinbox3
- HiBob4
- Widest raw gap
- Post-Market Monitoring35 vs 47
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Darwinbox and HiBob are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Darwinbox | HiBob |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | GB |
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight24% of the movement so far
Darwinbox28HiBob201.4 weighted points to Darwinbox
- 2
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight48% of the movement so far
Darwinbox35HiBob471.4 weighted points to HiBob
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight64% of the movement so far
Darwinbox60HiBob551.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight80% of the movement so far
Darwinbox55HiBob631.0 weighted points to HiBob
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight92% of the movement so far
Darwinbox30HiBob350.8 weighted points to HiBob
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight98% of the movement so far
Darwinbox57HiBob610.3 weighted points to HiBob
- 7
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Darwinbox58HiBob570.1 weighted points to Darwinbox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.9.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus HiBob, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | HiBob | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 20 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 63 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 47 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 61 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46F | 46F | - | -0.9 |
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.
| Criterion | Weight | Darwinbox | HiBob | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 29 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; HiBob has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 29 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for HiBob, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiBob 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.