§ The result
Hireology leads Willo by 16 points.
Hireology finishes 16 points clear of Willo under rubric v1.0 — 57 against 41 — across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. Willo takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 5 for Hireology, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Hireology 83, Willo 30) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 58% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 5 criteria it leads.
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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
§ The record
Hireology is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Willo under Video interview 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. Only Willo is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Hireology | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2010 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hireology 83 · Willo 30
9.5 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hireology 59 · Willo 36
2.8 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Hireology 50 · Willo 38
2.4 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Hireology 35 · Willo 25
1.5 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hireology 57 · Willo 62
0.6 weighted points to Willo
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hireology 58 · Willo 54
0.3 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Hireology 52 · Willo 53
0.1 weighted points to Willo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +16 beside that +15.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hireology minus Willo.
| Category | Weight | Hireology | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 30 | +53 | +9.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 53 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 59 | 36 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 41 (F) | +16 | +15.8 |
§ 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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 9 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Hireology has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 29 for Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hireology last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo 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