§ The result
Greenhouse leads Teamtailor on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Greenhouse finishes 20 points clear of Teamtailor inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 67 (D) against 47 (F). Greenhouse leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Teamtailor is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Greenhouse leads is Customer Documentation, Greenhouse 64 to Teamtailor 62. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Greenhouse 86, Teamtailor 30 — and at an 18% weight it carries 50% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 6 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Greenhouse and Teamtailor are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Sourcing and Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Greenhouse | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2012 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · Teamtailor 30
10.1 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · Teamtailor 50
5.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · Teamtailor 42
1.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · Teamtailor 54
1.4 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · Teamtailor 58
0.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · Teamtailor 62
0.2 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +20.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.1 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 +20.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 50 | +28 | +5.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 30 | +56 | +10.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 54 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 62 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 47 (F) | +20 | +20.1 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 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 | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 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 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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