§ The result
iCIMS leads micro1 on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, iCIMS (ATS-integrated) opens a 19-point lead on micro1 (Screening), 55 to 36. Of the 7 criteria micro1 wins none, and the narrowest lead iCIMS holds is on Article 11 Technical Documentation, iCIMS 58 to micro1 50. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — iCIMS 68, micro1 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage iCIMS holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
iCIMS
Enterprise talent-acquisition / applicant tracking platform (the iCIMS Talent Cloud) that adds optional AI features - Candidate Ranking, Talent Match, and a GPT-powered Copilot - to source, rank, and engage candidates.
Vendor profile
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
iCIMS is filed under ATS-integrated AI, micro1 under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only micro1 is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | iCIMS | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2000 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iCIMS 68 · micro1 20
8.6 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 58% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iCIMS 38 · micro1 22
2.4 weighted points to iCIMS
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iCIMS 42 · micro1 25
2.0 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iCIMS 56 · micro1 45
1.6 weighted points to iCIMS
20% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
iCIMS 58 · micro1 50
1.6 weighted points to iCIMS
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iCIMS 62 · micro1 45
1.4 weighted points to iCIMS
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
iCIMS 58 · micro1 48
1.2 weighted points to iCIMS
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +18.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 18.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +19 beside that +18.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iCIMS minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | iCIMS | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 20 | +48 | +8.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 22 | +16 | +2.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 45 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 48 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 36 (F) | +19 | +18.9 |
§ 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 | iCIMS | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
iCIMS has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for iCIMS, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iCIMS last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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