Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Gloat vs Recruiterflow
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
Recruiterflow
Recruiterflow is an ATS and CRM for recruiting agencies and executive search firms. Its AIRA AI layer ranks candidates already in a firm's database against each job with an explainable 0–100 Criteria Score (AIRA Matchmaker, shown as the 'AI Matches' card), and adds natural-language candidate search, external profile sourcing and an AI call notetaker that fills in interview scorecards.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Gloat leads Recruiterflow by 11 points.
Gloat, filed under Sourcing, comes out 11 points above Recruiterflow, filed under ATS-integrated: 47 against 36 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Gloat: Gloat is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Recruiterflow on FRIA Support. The advantage Gloat holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Gloat 38, Recruiterflow 18, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 34% of the weighted points Gloat gains across the 6 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Gloat6
- Recruiterflow1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency38 vs 18
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Gloat is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Recruiterflow under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Gloat is in scope of
| Record | Gloat | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2017 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight33% of the movement so far
Gloat38Recruiterflow183.6 weighted points to Gloat
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight60% of the movement so far
Gloat48Recruiterflow333.0 weighted points to Gloat
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight79% of the movement so far
Gloat58Recruiterflow442.1 weighted points to Gloat
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight89% of the movement so far
Gloat42Recruiterflow331.1 weighted points to Gloat
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight93% of the movement so far
Gloat62Recruiterflow580.5 weighted points to Gloat
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight97% of the movement so far
Gloat62Recruiterflow560.5 weighted points to Gloat
- 7
FRIA Support
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Gloat28Recruiterflow300.3 weighted points to Recruiterflow
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +10.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.0 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 +10.4.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Gloat minus Recruiterflow, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Gloat | Recruiterflow | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 33 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 18 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 44 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 33 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 56 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 47F | 36F | +11 | +10.4 |
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 | Recruiterflow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 6 | 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; Recruiterflow has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Gloat, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for Recruiterflow, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruiterflow 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.