HomeCompareGlider AI vs HireQuotient

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Glider AI vs HireQuotient

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Glider AI leads HireQuotient by 18 points.

Glider AI finishes 18 points clear of HireQuotient under rubric v1.0 — 52 against 34 — across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Glider AI: Glider AI is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and HireQuotient on Human Oversight Design. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Glider AI 68, HireQuotient 18) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 49% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Glider AI is filed under Assessment AI, HireQuotient under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.

Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordGlider AIHireQuotient
Price tierMidLow
HeadquartersUSSG
Founded20202021

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 48% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Glider AI 68 · HireQuotient 18

    9.0 weighted points to Glider AI

  2. 20% weight · 66% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Glider AI 52 · HireQuotient 35

    3.4 weighted points to Glider AI

  3. 15% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Glider AI 54 · HireQuotient 40

    2.1 weighted points to Glider AI

  4. 15% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Glider AI 35 · HireQuotient 22

    1.9 weighted points to Glider AI

  5. 12% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Glider AI 40 · HireQuotient 30

    1.2 weighted points to Glider AI

  6. 8% weight · 99% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Glider AI 60 · HireQuotient 50

    0.8 weighted points to Glider AI

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Glider AI 55 · HireQuotient 57

    0.2 weighted points to HireQuotient

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +18.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +18 beside that +18.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Glider AI minus HireQuotient.

CategoryWeightGlider AIHireQuotientΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5235+17+3.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%6818+50+9.0
FRIA Support15%3522+13+1.9
Data Governance Disclosure15%5440+14+2.1
Human Oversight Design12%5557-2-0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%4030+10+1.2
Customer Documentation8%6050+10+0.8
Total100%52 (F)34 (F)+18+18.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightGlider AIHireQuotient
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%276Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain245Sources on the vendor's own domain

Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains, and 29 for HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Glider AI last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireQuotient 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.