§ The result
isolved leads ZipRecruiter on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, isolved, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 47 and ZipRecruiter, filed under Sourcing, on 40, 7 points apart. ZipRecruiter is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: isolved takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Data Governance Disclosure, isolved 53 to ZipRecruiter 52. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — isolved 45, ZipRecruiter 24 — and at an 18% weight it carries 51% of the weighted advantage isolved holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
Vendor profile
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
isolved is filed under ATS-integrated AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | isolved | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 1986 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · ZipRecruiter 24
3.8 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · ZipRecruiter 40
2.0 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · ZipRecruiter 40
0.8 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · ZipRecruiter 27
0.4 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.2 weighted points to isolved
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · ZipRecruiter 52
0.1 weighted points to isolved
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +7.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +7.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | isolved | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 24 | +21 | +3.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 52 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 55 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 40 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 54 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 40 (F) | +7 | +7.4 |
§ 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 | isolved | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved and ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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