§ The result
Hireology leads isolved by 10 points.
Rubric v1.0 scores the ATS-integrated entries Hireology and isolved at 57 and 47, a gap of 10 points. isolved takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Data Governance Disclosure among them, against 5 for Hireology, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Hireology 83, isolved 45 — and at an 18% weight it carries 73% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Hireology
Hireology is an applicant tracking and hiring platform for multi-location auto dealers, healthcare providers and hospitality operators. Its AI features score applicants against employer-defined criteria (AI Match) and run rubric-scored, voice-based first-round screening interviews (AI Interview).
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
§ The record
Hireology and isolved are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Hireology | isolved |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2010 | 1986 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hireology 83 · isolved 45
6.8 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hireology 59 · isolved 47
1.4 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Hireology 35 · isolved 30
0.8 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hireology 57 · isolved 55
0.2 weighted points to Hireology
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hireology 58 · isolved 56
0.2 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Hireology 52 · isolved 53
0.1 weighted points to isolved
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +9.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hireology minus isolved.
| Category | Weight | Hireology | isolved | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 45 | +38 | +6.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 53 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 59 | 47 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 56 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 47 (F) | +10 | +9.3 |
§ 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 | Hireology | isolved | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 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% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 4 | 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 |
Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology and isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hireology last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- isolved 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