§ The result
Jack & Jill leads Intervue.io on all 7 criteria.
Jack & Jill finishes 18 points clear of Intervue.io under rubric v1.0 — 49 against 31 — across the Sourcing and Video interview cohorts. Jack & Jill leads every one of the 7 criteria, Intervue.io none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Intervue.io 54 to Jack & Jill 58. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Intervue.io 12, Jack & Jill 62) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 51% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
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
Intervue.io is filed under Video interview AI, Jack & Jill under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Intervue.io | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | GB |
| Founded | 2020 | 2025 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Intervue.io 12 · Jack & Jill 62
9.0 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Intervue.io 28 · Jack & Jill 44
3.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Intervue.io 30 · Jack & Jill 48
2.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Intervue.io 38 · Jack & Jill 48
1.5 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Intervue.io 22 · Jack & Jill 28
0.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Intervue.io 54 · Jack & Jill 58
0.5 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Intervue.io 50 · Jack & Jill 56
0.5 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -18 beside that -17.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Intervue.io minus Jack & Jill.
| Category | Weight | Intervue.io | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 44 | -16 | -3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 62 | -50 | -9.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 28 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 58 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 48 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 56 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 31 (F) | 49 (F) | -18 | -17.7 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Intervue.io | 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% | 5 | 1 | — | 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% | 7 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 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 Intervue.io and Jack & Jill sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Intervue.io 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