§ The result
Intervue.io takes the total, Moonhub takes more of the criteria.
Intervue.io holds a 1-point edge over Moonhub under rubric v1.0, 31 to 30, across the Video interview and Sourcing cohorts. Moonhub leads more of the criteria, 4 against 3 for Intervue.io, yet Intervue.io takes Post-Market Monitoring, which carries 12% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Moonhub takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Intervue.io 12 to Moonhub 18, 48% of the weighted advantage Moonhub holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Customer Documentation, Intervue.io 50 to Moonhub 38.
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
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Intervue.io is filed under Video interview AI, Moonhub 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 | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2020 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 22% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Intervue.io 12 · Moonhub 18
1.1 weighted points to Moonhub
12% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Intervue.io 30 · Moonhub 22
1.0 weighted points to Intervue.io
8% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Intervue.io 50 · Moonhub 38
1.0 weighted points to Intervue.io
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Intervue.io 54 · Moonhub 48
0.7 weighted points to Intervue.io
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Intervue.io 22 · Moonhub 25
0.4 weighted points to Moonhub
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Intervue.io 28 · Moonhub 30
0.4 weighted points to Moonhub
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Intervue.io 38 · Moonhub 40
0.3 weighted points to Moonhub
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +0.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.9 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 +0.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Intervue.io minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Intervue.io | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 18 | -6 | -1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 48 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 22 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 31 (F) | 30 (F) | +1 | +0.4 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Intervue.io 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: 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Intervue.io last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 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