§ The result
Jack & Jill leads HireQuotient on all 7 criteria.
Jack & Jill finishes 15 points clear of HireQuotient inside the Sourcing cohort under rubric v1.0: 49 against 34. Jack & Jill leads every one of the 7 criteria, HireQuotient none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, HireQuotient 57 to Jack & Jill 58. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HireQuotient 18, Jack & Jill 62 — and at an 18% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HireQuotient
EasySource by HireQuotient is an AI recruiting platform for North American frontline employers that sources and scores candidates from LinkedIn, the open web and partner databases, verifies licences, automates outreach including AI voice calls, and adds an ATS, interview scheduling, and skills, cognitive and AI-scored video assessments.
Vendor profile
Jack & Jill
Jack & Jill is a London AI recruiting marketplace. Its free career agent, Jack, interviews and profiles candidates, and its employer-side AI recruiter, Jill, turns a role brief into a scoring rubric, ranks candidates from Jack's network (and optionally public profiles) with a percentage match, and arranges introductions only when both sides agree.
§ The record
HireQuotient and Jack & Jill are both filed 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. Only HireQuotient is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HireQuotient | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | GB |
| Founded | 2021 | 2025 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HireQuotient 18 · Jack & Jill 62
7.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HireQuotient 30 · Jack & Jill 48
2.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HireQuotient 35 · Jack & Jill 44
1.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HireQuotient 40 · Jack & Jill 48
1.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HireQuotient 22 · Jack & Jill 28
0.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HireQuotient 50 · Jack & Jill 56
0.5 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HireQuotient 57 · Jack & Jill 58
0.1 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -14.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -14.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HireQuotient minus Jack & Jill.
| Category | Weight | HireQuotient | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 44 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 62 | -44 | -7.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 28 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 48 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 56 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 34 (F) | 49 (F) | -15 | -14.6 |
§ 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 | HireQuotient | Jack & Jill | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
HireQuotient has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill 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 HireQuotient, across 1 distinct source domain, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HireQuotient last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Jack & Jill 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