HomeCompareJack & Jill vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Jack & Jill vs LinkedIn Recruiter

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

LinkedIn Recruiter leads Jack & Jill by 8 points.

LinkedIn Recruiter finishes 8 points ahead of Jack & Jill under rubric v1.0, 57 to 49, both scored as Sourcing entries. LinkedIn Recruiter leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Jack & Jill leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Jack & Jill 44, LinkedIn Recruiter 67) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 44% of the weighted advantage LinkedIn Recruiter holds across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Jack & Jill and LinkedIn Recruiter are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773.

RecordJack & JillLinkedIn Recruiter
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersGBUS
Founded20252002

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 37% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Jack & Jill 44 · LinkedIn Recruiter 67

    4.6 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  2. 18% weight · 54% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Jack & Jill 62 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    2.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill

  3. 15% weight · 71% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Jack & Jill 48 · LinkedIn Recruiter 62

    2.1 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  4. 15% weight · 83% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Jack & Jill 28 · LinkedIn Recruiter 38

    1.5 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  5. 12% weight · 90% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Jack & Jill 58 · LinkedIn Recruiter 66

    1.0 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  6. 8% weight · 98% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Jack & Jill 56 · LinkedIn Recruiter 68

    1.0 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Jack & Jill 48 · LinkedIn Recruiter 50

    0.2 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -8.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Jack & Jill minus LinkedIn Recruiter.

CategoryWeightJack & JillLinkedIn RecruiterΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4467-23-4.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%6250+12+2.2
FRIA Support15%2838-10-1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%4862-14-2.1
Human Oversight Design12%5866-8-1.0
Post-Market Monitoring12%4850-2-0.2
Customer Documentation8%5668-12-1.0
Total100%49 (F)57 (F)-8-8.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightJack & JillLinkedIn Recruiter
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%60Audit reportSources on a separate domain41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Audit reportSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%71Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain50Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%80Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain61Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%315Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain345Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; LinkedIn Recruiter has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and LinkedIn Recruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 75 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 39 for LinkedIn Recruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Jack & Jill last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
LinkedIn Recruiter 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.