§ The result
Hireology leads ZipRecruiter on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Hireology (ATS-integrated) opens a 17-point lead on ZipRecruiter (Sourcing), 57 to 40. ZipRecruiter is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Hireology takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, Hireology 57 to ZipRecruiter 55. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Hireology 83, ZipRecruiter 24 — and at an 18% weight it carries 64% of the weighted advantage Hireology holds across the 6 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
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
Hireology is filed under ATS-integrated AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing 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 | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2010 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Hireology 83 · ZipRecruiter 24
10.6 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Hireology 59 · ZipRecruiter 40
2.3 weighted points to Hireology
20% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Hireology 50 · ZipRecruiter 40
2.0 weighted points to Hireology
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Hireology 35 · ZipRecruiter 27
1.2 weighted points to Hireology
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Hireology 58 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.3 weighted points to Hireology
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Hireology 57 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.2 weighted points to Hireology
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +16.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +17 beside that +16.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Hireology minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Hireology | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 24 | +59 | +10.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 59 | 40 | +19 | +2.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 40 (F) | +17 | +16.7 |
§ 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 | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 28 | 5 | Sources 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; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Hireology and 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 Hireology, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Hireology 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