Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Gloat vs Moonhub
Gloat
Gloat is an AI-powered internal talent marketplace and "agentic HR" platform that matches an employer's existing employees to internal job openings, gigs, projects, mentorships, and learning based on inferred skills and career goals.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
Gloat leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
The Sourcing cohort pairing of Gloat and Moonhub comes out 47 to 30 under rubric v1.0, a 17-point lead for Gloat. Gloat leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Moonhub leads none. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Gloat 62, Moonhub 38) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Gloat 48, Moonhub 30), 22% of the weighted advantage Gloat builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Gloat7
- Moonhub0
- Widest raw gap
- Customer Documentation62 vs 38
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Gloat and Moonhub are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Gloat is in scope of
| Record | Gloat | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2022 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight22% of the movement so far
Gloat48Moonhub303.6 weighted points to Gloat
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight44% of the movement so far
Gloat38Moonhub183.6 weighted points to Gloat
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight61% of the movement so far
Gloat58Moonhub402.7 weighted points to Gloat
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight75% of the movement so far
Gloat42Moonhub222.4 weighted points to Gloat
- 5
Customer Documentation
8% weight87% of the movement so far
Gloat62Moonhub381.9 weighted points to Gloat
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight97% of the movement so far
Gloat62Moonhub481.7 weighted points to Gloat
- 7
FRIA Support
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Gloat28Moonhub250.4 weighted points to Gloat
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +16.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +17 beside that +16.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Gloat minus Moonhub, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Gloat | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 30 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 18 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 22 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 38 | +24 | +1.9 |
| Total | 100% | 47F | 30F | +17 | +16.4 |
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 | Gloat | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Gloat has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Gloat, across 1 distinct source domain, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 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
Scored against