§ The result
Hireology takes the total, SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting takes more of the criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Hireology and SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting finish 4 points apart, 57 to 53, as two ATS-integrated entries. SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting leads more of the criteria, 4 against 2 for Hireology, yet Hireology takes Bias Audit Transparency, which carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Hireology 83, SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 40 — and at an 18% weight it carries 77% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 2 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
SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting
SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting is the recruiting module of SAP's cloud HCM suite, using AI (career-site skills matching, job-description generation, resume skills extraction and stack-ranking of applicants) delivered under SAP Business AI and the Joule assistant.
§ The record
Hireology and SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 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 | SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2010 | 1972 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hireology 83 · SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 40
7.7 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Hireology 50 · SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 70
4.0 weighted points to SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hireology 59 · SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 40
2.3 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Hireology 52 · SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 60
1.2 weighted points to SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hireology 57 · SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 62
0.6 weighted points to SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hireology 58 · SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting 62
0.3 weighted points to SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +3.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hireology minus SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting.
| Category | Weight | Hireology | SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 70 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 40 | +43 | +7.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 59 | 40 | +19 | +2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 53 (F) | +4 | +3.9 |
§ 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 | SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 17 | 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; SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 17 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology and SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains, and 22 for SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hireology last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting last reviewed
- June 7, 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