§ The result
Darwinbox leads HireLogic on all 7 criteria.
Darwinbox, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 12 points above HireLogic, filed under Video interview: 46 against 34 under rubric v1.0. Darwinbox takes all 7 criteria from HireLogic without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is FRIA Support, Darwinbox 30 to HireLogic 25. The advantage Darwinbox holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Darwinbox 60, HireLogic 42, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 32% of the weighted points Darwinbox gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
§ The record
Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HireLogic under Video interview 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 HireLogic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Darwinbox | HireLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · HireLogic 42
3.6 weighted points to Darwinbox
18% weight · 53% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · HireLogic 15
2.3 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · HireLogic 45
1.9 weighted points to Darwinbox
8% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · HireLogic 45
1.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · HireLogic 48
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · HireLogic 28
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · HireLogic 25
0.8 weighted points to Darwinbox
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +11.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus HireLogic.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | HireLogic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 42 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 15 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 48 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 45 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 34 (F) | +12 | +11.3 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 5 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 6 | 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; HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HireLogic 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