Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Handshake vs Jack & Jill
Handshake
Handshake is an early-career recruiting network whose employer tools use AI to rank applicants against employer-set criteria, find and message matching students and graduates, and target job promotions.
Substantial gaps
Screening
Jack & Jill
Jack & Jill is a London AI recruiting marketplace. Its free career agent, Jack, interviews and profiles candidates, and its employer-side AI recruiter, Jill, turns a role brief into a scoring rubric, ranks candidates from Jack's network (and optionally public profiles) with a percentage match, and arranges introductions only when both sides agree.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
1 point separates Handshake and Jack & Jill.
Handshake holds a 1-point edge over Jack & Jill under rubric v1.0, 50 to 49, across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 1 in favour of Handshake, with 2 level: Handshake is ahead on Data Governance Disclosure and Jack & Jill on Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Jack & Jill — Handshake 52, Jack & Jill 62, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Handshake4
- Jack & Jill1
- Level2
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency52 vs 62
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Handshake is filed under Screening AI, Jack & Jill under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Handshake | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 2025 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight39% of the movement so far
Handshake52Jack & Jill621.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight69% of the movement so far
Handshake57Jack & Jill481.3 weighted points to Handshake
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight86% of the movement so far
Handshake48Jack & Jill440.8 weighted points to Handshake
- 4
Customer Documentation
8% weight93% of the movement so far
Handshake60Jack & Jill560.3 weighted points to Handshake
- 5
FRIA Support
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Handshake30Jack & Jill280.3 weighted points to Handshake
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +1.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Handshake minus Jack & Jill, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Handshake | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 44 | +4 | +0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 48 | +9 | +1.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 48 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 50F | 49F | +1 | +1.0 |
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 | Handshake | Jack & Jill | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Handshake has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Handshake and Jack & Jill sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 70 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Handshake, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Handshake last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Jack & Jill 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.