HomeCompareDarwinbox vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Darwinbox vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

LinkedIn Recruiter leads Darwinbox on all 7 criteria.

LinkedIn Recruiter, filed under Sourcing, comes out 11 points above Darwinbox, filed under ATS-integrated: 57 against 46 under rubric v1.0. LinkedIn Recruiter leads every one of the 7 criteria, Darwinbox none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Data Governance Disclosure, Darwinbox 58 to LinkedIn Recruiter 62. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Darwinbox 28, LinkedIn Recruiter 50, 18% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage LinkedIn Recruiter builds across the 7 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Darwinbox is filed under ATS-integrated AI, LinkedIn Recruiter under Candidate sourcing 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.

RecordDarwinboxLinkedIn Recruiter
Price tierEnterpriseEnterprise
HeadquartersINUS
Founded20152002

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 35% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Darwinbox 28 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    4.0 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  2. 12% weight · 52% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Darwinbox 35 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    1.8 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  3. 20% weight · 64% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Darwinbox 60 · LinkedIn Recruiter 67

    1.4 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  4. 12% weight · 76% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Darwinbox 55 · LinkedIn Recruiter 66

    1.3 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  5. 15% weight · 87% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Darwinbox 30 · LinkedIn Recruiter 38

    1.2 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  6. 8% weight · 95% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Darwinbox 57 · LinkedIn Recruiter 68

    0.9 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  7. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Darwinbox 58 · LinkedIn Recruiter 62

    0.6 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.2 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 -11.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Darwinbox minus LinkedIn Recruiter.

CategoryWeightDarwinboxLinkedIn RecruiterΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%6067-7-1.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%2850-22-4.0
FRIA Support15%3038-8-1.2
Data Governance Disclosure15%5862-4-0.6
Human Oversight Design12%5566-11-1.3
Post-Market Monitoring12%3550-15-1.8
Customer Documentation8%5768-11-0.9
Total100%46 (F)57 (F)-11-11.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightDarwinboxLinkedIn Recruiter
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31—41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%247Sources on the vendor's own domain345Audit 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; LinkedIn Recruiter has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for LinkedIn Recruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 39 for LinkedIn Recruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Darwinbox last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
LinkedIn Recruiter 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.