Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs Radancy
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
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
Greenhouse leads Radancy on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 26 points between Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) and Radancy (Sourcing): 67 (D) for Greenhouse, 41 (F) for Radancy. Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Radancy leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Greenhouse 86, Radancy 20) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 45% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse7
- Radancy0
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency86 vs 20
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
Only Radancy is in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2006 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight45% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86Radancy2011.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight73% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78Radancy427.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight83% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58Radancy362.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight91% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42Radancy282.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
Human Oversight Design
12% weight95% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66Radancy571.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 6
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight99% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Radancy580.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64Radancy600.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +26.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 26.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +26 beside that +26.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Radancy, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 42 | +36 | +7.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 20 | +66 | +11.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 28 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 57 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 36 | +22 | +2.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 41F | +26 | +26.1 |
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 | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 16 | 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; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 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 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy last reviewed
- August 2, 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.