§ The result
Findem takes the total, SEEK takes more of the criteria.
Findem (Sourcing) edges SEEK (Screening) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 58 to 54. SEEK leads more of the criteria than Findem — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Findem leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Findem. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Findem 83, SEEK 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 90% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 2 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
Vendor profile
SEEK
SEEK runs employment marketplaces in Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia (SEEK, Jobstreet and Jobsdb), and its seekAi employer tools label and rank applicants as 'high-fit' using a model trained on millions of past hirer shortlisting decisions, target job ads at predicted high-fit candidates, and run AI voice or text pre-screens, recommended shortlists and reference checks through a feature called Assist.
§ The record
Findem is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, SEEK under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Findem | SEEK |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2019 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Findem 83 · SEEK 40
7.7 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Findem 58 · SEEK 70
2.4 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Findem 42 · SEEK 50
1.0 weighted points to SEEK
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Findem 38 · SEEK 32
0.9 weighted points to Findem
8% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Findem 58 · SEEK 64
0.5 weighted points to SEEK
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Findem 57 · SEEK 60
0.4 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Findem 60 · SEEK 62
0.2 weighted points to SEEK
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Findem minus SEEK.
| Category | Weight | Findem | SEEK | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 70 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 40 | +43 | +7.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 60 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 50 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 54 (F) | +4 | +4.1 |
§ 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 | Findem | SEEK | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; SEEK has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Findem and SEEK sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains, and 30 for SEEK, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Findem last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SEEK 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