Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs iMocha
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
iMocha
iMocha is an AI-powered skills assessment and skills-intelligence platform that evaluates candidates and employees across technical, cognitive, coding, and soft skills for hiring and internal talent management, including AI-based coding simulators and an AI video interviewer (Tara).
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
Greenhouse leads iMocha by 11 points.
Greenhouse, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 11 points above iMocha, filed under Assessment: 67 (D) against 56 (F) under rubric v1.0. Greenhouse leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while iMocha leads 2, including Data Governance Disclosure. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Greenhouse 86, iMocha 44 — and at an 18% weight it carries 65% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse5
- iMocha2
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency86 vs 44
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, iMocha under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only iMocha is in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | iMocha |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2012 | 2015 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight63% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86iMocha447.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight79% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78iMocha682.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight89% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58iMocha481.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight94% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42iMocha380.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight97% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64iMocha660.3 weighted points to iMocha
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight99% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66iMocha640.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64iMocha660.2 weighted points to iMocha
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +11.1 — 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 +11 beside that +11.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus iMocha, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | iMocha | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 68 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 44 | +42 | +7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 66 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 64 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 66 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 56F | +11 | +11.1 |
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 | iMocha | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | 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 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; iMocha has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and iMocha sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 26 for iMocha, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- iMocha 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.