§ The result
ZipRecruiter leads HireLogic by 6 points.
Under rubric v1.0, ZipRecruiter, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 40 and HireLogic, filed under Video interview, on 34, 6 points apart. ZipRecruiter leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while HireLogic leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Post-Market Monitoring (HireLogic 28, ZipRecruiter 40) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (HireLogic 15, ZipRecruiter 24), the second being 27% of the weighted advantage ZipRecruiter holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HireLogic
HireLogic joins phone, video and in-person interviews to transcribe them and generate AI notes, job-description coverage, candidate insights and flags for potentially discriminatory interviewer questions, and also offers an asynchronous AI interview agent that scores candidates on relevance and depth of knowledge.
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
HireLogic is filed under Video interview AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only HireLogic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HireLogic | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | Not recorded | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HireLogic 15 · ZipRecruiter 24
1.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HireLogic 28 · ZipRecruiter 40
1.4 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 65% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HireLogic 45 · ZipRecruiter 52
1.1 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HireLogic 48 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.8 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HireLogic 45 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.7 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
20% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HireLogic 42 · ZipRecruiter 40
0.4 weighted points to HireLogic
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HireLogic 25 · ZipRecruiter 27
0.3 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HireLogic minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | HireLogic | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 40 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 15 | 24 | -9 | -1.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 28 | 40 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 45 | 54 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 34 (F) | 40 (F) | -6 | -5.6 |
§ 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 | HireLogic | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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% | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HireLogic has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 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 ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for HireLogic, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HireLogic last reviewed
- September 25, 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