§ The result
Fetcher leads Intervue.io by 6 points.
Fetcher scores 37 and Intervue.io 31 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and Video interview cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Fetcher: Fetcher is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Intervue.io on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency, at 18%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Fetcher (Fetcher 28, Intervue.io 12), 42% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Data Governance Disclosure, Fetcher 55 to Intervue.io 38.
Vendor profile
Fetcher
AI-powered candidate sourcing and outbound recruiting platform that automates passive and active talent sourcing, personalized email outreach, and inbound applicant screening for corporate recruiting teams.
Vendor profile
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
§ The record
Fetcher is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Intervue.io under Video interview AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fetcher | Intervue.io |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2014 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fetcher 28 · Intervue.io 12
2.9 weighted points to Fetcher
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fetcher 55 · Intervue.io 38
2.5 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fetcher 35 · Intervue.io 30
0.6 weighted points to Fetcher
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fetcher 25 · Intervue.io 22
0.4 weighted points to Fetcher
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fetcher 55 · Intervue.io 50
0.4 weighted points to Fetcher
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fetcher 52 · Intervue.io 54
0.2 weighted points to Intervue.io
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fetcher 27 · Intervue.io 28
0.2 weighted points to Intervue.io
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 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 +6.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fetcher minus Intervue.io.
| Category | Weight | Fetcher | Intervue.io | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 27 | 28 | -1 | -0.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 12 | +16 | +2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 22 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 38 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 31 (F) | +6 | +6.4 |
§ 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 | Fetcher | Intervue.io | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Fetcher has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Fetcher, across 1 distinct source domain, and 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fetcher last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Intervue.io 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