§ The result
Hireology leads Darwinbox by 11 points.
Rubric v1.0 scores the ATS-integrated entries Hireology and Darwinbox at 57 and 46, a gap of 11 points. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Hireology: Hireology 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, Hireology 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 71% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 5 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
Hireology
Hireology is an applicant tracking and hiring platform for multi-location auto dealers, healthcare providers and hospitality operators. Its AI features score applicants against employer-defined criteria (AI Match) and run rubric-scored, voice-based first-round screening interviews (AI Interview).
§ The record
Darwinbox and Hireology are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Darwinbox | Hireology |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · Hireology 83
9.9 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · Hireology 59
2.9 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · Hireology 50
2.0 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · Hireology 52
0.9 weighted points to Darwinbox
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · Hireology 35
0.8 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · Hireology 57
0.2 weighted points to Hireology
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · Hireology 58
0.1 weighted points to Hireology
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus Hireology.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | Hireology | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 83 | -55 | -9.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 59 | -24 | -2.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 57 (F) | -11 | -11.0 |
§ 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 | Hireology | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 0 | 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 | 4 | 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 4 | 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; 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 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 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.
§ Where next