§ The result
Xobin leads Humanly on 5 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Xobin, filed under Assessment, finishes on 50 and Humanly, filed under Screening, on 42, 8 points apart. Humanly is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: Xobin takes 5, the remaining 2 are level, and the nearest of those 5 is Bias Audit Transparency, Humanly 40 to Xobin 43. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Humanly 45, Xobin 62 — and at a 20% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Xobin holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Humanly
Conversational AI for high-volume recruiting that engages, screens, and schedules candidates across chat, SMS, email, voice, and video, with structured AI interviews and automated scoring.
Vendor profile
Xobin
Xobin is a talent-assessment platform that sells skills, coding, communication and psychometric tests alongside generative-AI answer scoring (AI Evaluate), AI-led interviews, AI proctoring and NURA, an AI recruiting agent that parses resumes, interviews candidates and builds shortlists.
§ The record
Humanly is filed under Screening AI, Xobin under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Humanly | Xobin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2018 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Humanly 45 · Xobin 62
3.4 weighted points to Xobin
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Humanly 40 · Xobin 57
2.5 weighted points to Xobin
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Humanly 30 · Xobin 38
1.0 weighted points to Xobin
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Humanly 52 · Xobin 60
0.6 weighted points to Xobin
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Humanly 40 · Xobin 43
0.5 weighted points to Xobin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -8.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.1 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 -8.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Humanly minus Xobin.
| Category | Weight | Humanly | Xobin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 62 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 43 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 57 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 42 (F) | 50 (F) | -8 | -8.1 |
§ 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 | Humanly | Xobin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Humanly has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Xobin has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Xobin sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Humanly, across 3 distinct source domains, and 32 for Xobin, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Humanly last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Xobin 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