§ The result
HiredScore leads ZipRecruiter by 12 points.
Both filed under Sourcing, HiredScore and ZipRecruiter come out 52 and 40 under rubric v1.0, 12 points in favour of HiredScore. HiredScore leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while ZipRecruiter leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HiredScore 55, ZipRecruiter 24 — and at an 18% weight it carries 44% of the weighted advantage HiredScore holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiredScore
AI-driven talent orchestration layer that ranks and routes candidates within an existing ATS. Acquired by Workday in 2024.
Vendor profile
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
HiredScore and ZipRecruiter are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only ZipRecruiter is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | HiredScore | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiredScore 55 · ZipRecruiter 24
5.6 weighted points to HiredScore
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiredScore 65 · ZipRecruiter 40
5.0 weighted points to HiredScore
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiredScore 60 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.6 weighted points to HiredScore
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiredScore 35 · ZipRecruiter 40
0.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiredScore 60 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.5 weighted points to HiredScore
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiredScore 30 · ZipRecruiter 27
0.4 weighted points to HiredScore
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiredScore 55 · ZipRecruiter 52
0.4 weighted points to HiredScore
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiredScore minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | HiredScore | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 65 | 40 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 55 | 24 | +31 | +5.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 40 (F) | +12 | +12.0 |
§ 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 | HiredScore | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 7 | 2 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HiredScore has 9 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 7 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiredScore and ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 9 for HiredScore, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiredScore last reviewed
- May 21, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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