Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs iCIMS
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
Concerning
ATS-integrated
iCIMS
Enterprise talent-acquisition / applicant tracking platform (the iCIMS Talent Cloud) that adds optional AI features - Candidate Ranking, Talent Match, and a GPT-powered Copilot - to source, rank, and engage candidates.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Greenhouse leads iCIMS on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 scores the ATS-integrated entries Greenhouse and iCIMS at 67 (D) and 55 (F), a gap of 12 points. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria, iCIMS none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Customer Documentation, Greenhouse 64 to iCIMS 62. The advantage Greenhouse holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Greenhouse 78, iCIMS 58, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 33% of the weighted points Greenhouse gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse7
- iCIMS0
- Widest raw gap
- Article 11 Technical Documentation78 vs 58
- 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.
Greenhouse and iCIMS are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Sourcing and Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | iCIMS |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2000 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight33% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78iCIMS584.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight60% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86iCIMS683.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight76% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58iCIMS421.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight86% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64iCIMS561.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight94% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66iCIMS581.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 6
FRIA Support
15% weight99% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42iCIMS380.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64iCIMS620.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus iCIMS, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | iCIMS | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 58 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 68 | +18 | +3.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 62 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 55F | +12 | +12.1 |
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 | Greenhouse | iCIMS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 21 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; iCIMS has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 3 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 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 24 for iCIMS, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iCIMS 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.