§ The result
Greenhouse leads isolved on all 7 criteria.
The ATS-integrated cohort pairing of Greenhouse and isolved comes out 67 (D) to 47 (F) under rubric v1.0, a 20-point lead for Greenhouse. Of the 7 criteria isolved wins none, and the narrowest lead Greenhouse holds is on Customer Documentation, Greenhouse 64 to isolved 56. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Greenhouse 86, isolved 45, 18% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
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.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
§ The record
Greenhouse and isolved are both filed under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Greenhouse | isolved |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 1986 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · isolved 45
7.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · isolved 50
5.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · isolved 30
1.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · isolved 53
1.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · isolved 55
1.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · isolved 47
1.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · isolved 56
0.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +19.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +20 beside that +19.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus isolved.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | isolved | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 50 | +28 | +5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 45 | +41 | +7.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 53 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 47 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 47 (F) | +20 | +19.7 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | isolved | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 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; isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- isolved 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.
§ Where next