HomeCompareGreenhouse vs HireQuotient

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Greenhouse vs HireQuotient

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Greenhouse leads HireQuotient on all 7 criteria.

Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and HireQuotient (Sourcing) are 33 points apart under rubric v1.0, 67 (D) for Greenhouse against 34 (F) for HireQuotient. HireQuotient leads none of the 7 criteria, and Greenhouse is ahead on 5 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them. The advantage Greenhouse holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Greenhouse 86, HireQuotient 18, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 37% of the weighted points Greenhouse gains across the 7 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, HireQuotient under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

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

RecordGreenhouseHireQuotient
Price tierEnterpriseLow
HeadquartersUSSG
Founded20122021

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 37% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Greenhouse 86 · HireQuotient 18

    12.2 weighted points to Greenhouse

  2. 20% weight · 63% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Greenhouse 78 · HireQuotient 35

    8.6 weighted points to Greenhouse

  3. 15% weight · 74% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Greenhouse 64 · HireQuotient 40

    3.6 weighted points to Greenhouse

  4. 12% weight · 84% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Greenhouse 58 · HireQuotient 30

    3.4 weighted points to Greenhouse

  5. 15% weight · 93% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Greenhouse 42 · HireQuotient 22

    3.0 weighted points to Greenhouse

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Greenhouse 64 · HireQuotient 50

    1.1 weighted points to Greenhouse

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

    Human Oversight Design

    Greenhouse 66 · HireQuotient 57

    1.1 weighted points to Greenhouse

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +33.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 33.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +33 beside that +33.0.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Greenhouse minus HireQuotient.

CategoryWeightGreenhouseHireQuotientΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%7835+43+8.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%8618+68+12.2
FRIA Support15%4222+20+3.0
Data Governance Disclosure15%6440+24+3.6
Human Oversight Design12%6657+9+1.1
Post-Market Monitoring12%5830+28+3.4
Customer Documentation8%6450+14+1.1
Total100%67 (D)34 (F)+33+33.0

§ 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.

CriterionWeightGreenhouseHireQuotient
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%30Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%20Audit reportSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%20Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%20Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%30Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%161Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain245Sources on the vendor's own domain

Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Greenhouse last reviewed
June 7, 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.