Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs Oleeo
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
Oleeo
Oleeo is an enterprise applicant tracking and talent acquisition platform that uses machine learning to score, rank, and screen candidates from resumes, applications, and assessment responses, with prescriptive interview and hire recommendations and a stated diversity/bias-mitigation focus.
Substantial gaps
ATS-integrated
The result
Greenhouse leads Oleeo on all 7 criteria.
Greenhouse and Oleeo, both ATS-integrated entries, are 27 points apart under rubric v1.0, 67 (D) for Greenhouse against 40 (F) for Oleeo. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Oleeo leads none. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Greenhouse 86, Oleeo 40, 18% weight), is only 31% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse7
- Oleeo0
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency86 vs 40
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% 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 Oleeo are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | Oleeo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2012 | 1995 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight31% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86Oleeo408.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight60% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78Oleeo407.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight72% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58Oleeo303.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight83% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Oleeo452.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight92% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42Oleeo252.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight97% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66Oleeo551.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Oleeo550.7 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +26.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 26.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +27 beside that +26.7.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Oleeo, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Oleeo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 40 | +38 | +7.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 40 | +46 | +8.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 45 | +19 | +2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 30 | +28 | +3.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 55 | +9 | +0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 40F | +27 | +26.7 |
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 | Oleeo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 10 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Oleeo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 with a source URL, 6 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 33 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Oleeo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Oleeo 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.