§ The result
HighMatch leads JobDiva on all 7 criteria.
HighMatch, filed under Assessment, comes out 14 points above JobDiva, filed under ATS-integrated: 43 against 29 under rubric v1.0. HighMatch leads every one of the 7 criteria, JobDiva none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, HighMatch 30 to JobDiva 22. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (HighMatch 60, JobDiva 40) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (HighMatch 45, JobDiva 28), the second being 24% of the weighted advantage HighMatch holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HighMatch
HighMatch sells pre-employment assessments built by I-O psychologists (personality, cognitive, skills, situational judgment, culture fit and minimum-qualification screens), including the Berke Assessment for small businesses, that score candidates against weighted, role-specific hiring profiles and return job-fit scores, trait reports and tailored interview guides.
Vendor profile
JobDiva
JobDiva is an all-in-one ATS, CRM, onboarding, back-office and VMS-synchronization platform for staffing agencies, with AI features including DivaMatch candidate-to-job scoring, AI-enhanced matching and semantic search, resume harvesting and generative outreach.
§ The record
HighMatch is filed under Assessment AI, JobDiva under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only HighMatch is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HighMatch | JobDiva |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2005 | 2003 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 24% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HighMatch 45 · JobDiva 28
3.4 weighted points to HighMatch
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HighMatch 30 · JobDiva 15
2.7 weighted points to HighMatch
12% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HighMatch 60 · JobDiva 40
2.4 weighted points to HighMatch
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HighMatch 52 · JobDiva 38
2.1 weighted points to HighMatch
8% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HighMatch 58 · JobDiva 42
1.3 weighted points to HighMatch
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HighMatch 30 · JobDiva 22
1.2 weighted points to HighMatch
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HighMatch 40 · JobDiva 30
1.2 weighted points to HighMatch
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +14.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HighMatch minus JobDiva.
| Category | Weight | HighMatch | JobDiva | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 28 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 15 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 22 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 40 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +1.3 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 29 (F) | +14 | +14.3 |
§ 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 | HighMatch | JobDiva | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 20 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HighMatch has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; JobDiva has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HighMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 63 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for HighMatch, across 2 distinct source domains, and 28 for JobDiva, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HighMatch last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- JobDiva 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