HomeCompareHirePro vs Moonhub

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

HirePro vs Moonhub

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

HirePro leads Moonhub on 5 of the 7 criteria.

HirePro scores 38 and Moonhub 30 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. HirePro leads 5 of the 7 criteria and the remaining 2 are level, so Moonhub is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 5 HirePro leads is Human Oversight Design, HirePro 55 to Moonhub 48. Even Bias Audit Transparency, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (HirePro 33, Moonhub 18, 18% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage HirePro builds across the 5 criteria it leads.

§ The record

HirePro is filed under Screening AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only HirePro is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordHireProMoonhub
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersINUS
Founded20042022

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 35% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    HirePro 33 · Moonhub 18

    2.7 weighted points to HirePro

  2. 12% weight · 55% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    HirePro 35 · Moonhub 22

    1.6 weighted points to HirePro

  3. 15% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    HirePro 50 · Moonhub 40

    1.5 weighted points to HirePro

  4. 8% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    HirePro 52 · Moonhub 38

    1.1 weighted points to HirePro

  5. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    HirePro 55 · Moonhub 48

    0.8 weighted points to HirePro

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +7.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +7.7.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is HirePro minus Moonhub.

CategoryWeightHireProMoonhubΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3030--
Bias Audit Transparency18%3318+15+2.7
FRIA Support15%2525--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5040+10+1.5
Human Oversight Design12%5548+7+0.8
Post-Market Monitoring12%3522+13+1.6
Customer Documentation8%5238+14+1.1
Total100%38 (F)30 (F)+8+7.7

§ 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.

CriterionWeightHireProMoonhub
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21—11—
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain01—
Data Governance Disclosure15%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain11—
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11—
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%216Sources on the vendor's own domain67Sources on the vendor's own domain

HirePro has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 27 for HirePro, across 1 distinct source domain, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
HirePro last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Moonhub 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.