Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Gloat vs Rippling
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
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Rippling leads Gloat by 9 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Rippling, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 56 and Gloat, filed under Sourcing, on 47, 9 points apart. Gloat takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Rippling, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Gloat 48, Rippling 73 — and at a 20% weight it carries 50% of the weighted advantage Rippling holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Gloat1
- Rippling6
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation48 vs 73
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Gloat is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Gloat is in scope of
| Record | Gloat | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2016 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight49% of the movement so far
Gloat48Rippling735.0 weighted points to Rippling
- 2
FRIA Support
15% weight74% of the movement so far
Gloat28Rippling452.5 weighted points to Rippling
- 3
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight83% of the movement so far
Gloat58Rippling640.9 weighted points to Rippling
- 4
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight90% of the movement so far
Gloat38Rippling420.7 weighted points to Rippling
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight96% of the movement so far
Gloat42Rippling470.6 weighted points to Rippling
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight98% of the movement so far
Gloat62Rippling600.2 weighted points to Gloat
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Gloat62Rippling640.2 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -9.7.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Gloat minus Rippling, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Gloat | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 73 | -25 | -5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 45 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 64 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 47 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 64 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 47F | 56F | -9 | -9.7 |
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 | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Gloat has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence.
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 Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Gloat last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling last reviewed
- July 17, 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.