§ The result
iCIMS takes the total, SEEK takes more of the criteria.
iCIMS (ATS-integrated) edges SEEK (Screening) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 55 to 54. SEEK leads more of the criteria than iCIMS — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which iCIMS leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to iCIMS. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (iCIMS 68, SEEK 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 85% of the weighted advantage iCIMS holds across the 2 criteria it leads.
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
SEEK
SEEK runs employment marketplaces in Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia (SEEK, Jobstreet and Jobsdb), and its seekAi employer tools label and rank applicants as 'high-fit' using a model trained on millions of past hirer shortlisting decisions, target job ads at predicted high-fit candidates, and run AI voice or text pre-screens, recommended shortlists and reference checks through a feature called Assist.
§ The record
iCIMS is filed under ATS-integrated AI, SEEK under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | iCIMS | SEEK |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AU |
| Founded | 2000 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iCIMS 68 · SEEK 40
5.0 weighted points to iCIMS
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
iCIMS 58 · SEEK 70
2.4 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iCIMS 42 · SEEK 50
1.0 weighted points to SEEK
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iCIMS 38 · SEEK 32
0.9 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iCIMS 56 · SEEK 60
0.6 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
iCIMS 58 · SEEK 62
0.5 weighted points to SEEK
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iCIMS 62 · SEEK 64
0.2 weighted points to SEEK
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iCIMS minus SEEK.
| Category | Weight | iCIMS | SEEK | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 70 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 40 | +28 | +5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 32 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 50 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 64 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 54 (F) | +1 | +1.3 |
§ 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 | SEEK | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 23 | 7 | Audit reportSources 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; SEEK has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for SEEK sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for iCIMS, across 2 distinct source domains, and 30 for SEEK, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iCIMS last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SEEK 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