Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Greenhouse vs RippleMatch
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
RippleMatch
RippleMatch is an early-career recruiting platform that sources students and recent graduates for employers' roles, ranks applicants with a 0-100 Fit Score built from criteria the recruiter configures, and adds verified skill badges, applicant review, interview scheduling and campus-event tools.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
Greenhouse leads RippleMatch on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Greenhouse (ATS-integrated) opens a 21-point lead on RippleMatch (Sourcing), 67 (D) to 46 (F). RippleMatch leads none of the 7 criteria, and Greenhouse is ahead on 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Greenhouse 86, RippleMatch 53) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Greenhouse 78, RippleMatch 46), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Greenhouse7
- RippleMatch0
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency86 vs 53
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Article 11 Technical Documentation20% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Greenhouse is filed under ATS-integrated AI, RippleMatch under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Greenhouse | RippleMatch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2016 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight31% of the movement so far
Greenhouse78RippleMatch466.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 2
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight60% of the movement so far
Greenhouse86RippleMatch535.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 3
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight72% of the movement so far
Greenhouse58RippleMatch372.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight83% of the movement so far
Greenhouse42RippleMatch272.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight93% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64RippleMatch502.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 6
Human Oversight Design
12% weight98% of the movement so far
Greenhouse66RippleMatch571.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Greenhouse64RippleMatch600.3 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +20.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +21 beside that +20.6.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus RippleMatch, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | RippleMatch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 46 | +32 | +6.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 53 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 27 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 50 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 57 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 37 | +21 | +2.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 67D | 46F | +21 | +20.6 |
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 | RippleMatch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 35 | 7 | 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; RippleMatch has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and RippleMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 42 for RippleMatch, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- RippleMatch 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.