§ The result
Greenhouse leads Recruiterflow on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Greenhouse scores 67 (D) to 36 (F) for Recruiterflow, a 31-point gap between two ATS-integrated entries. Recruiterflow leads none of the 7 criteria, and Greenhouse is ahead on 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Greenhouse 86, Recruiterflow 18 — and at an 18% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Recruiterflow
Recruiterflow is an ATS and CRM for recruiting agencies and executive search firms. Its AIRA AI layer ranks candidates already in a firm's database against each job with an explainable 0–100 Criteria Score (AIRA Matchmaker, shown as the 'AI Matches' card), and adds natural-language candidate search, external profile sourcing and an AI call notetaker that fills in interview scorecards.
§ The record
Greenhouse and Recruiterflow are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Greenhouse is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Greenhouse | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · Recruiterflow 18
12.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · Recruiterflow 33
9.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · Recruiterflow 44
3.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · Recruiterflow 33
3.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · Recruiterflow 30
1.8 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · Recruiterflow 58
1.0 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · Recruiterflow 56
0.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +30.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 30.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +31 beside that +30.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Recruiterflow.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Recruiterflow | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 33 | +45 | +9.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 18 | +68 | +12.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 30 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 44 | +20 | +3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 33 | +25 | +3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 36 (F) | +31 | +30.6 |
§ 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 | Recruiterflow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 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 | 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 | 25 | 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; Recruiterflow has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for Recruiterflow, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruiterflow 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