HomeCompareJack & Jill vs micro1

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Jack & Jill vs micro1

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Jack & Jill leads micro1 by 13 points.

Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing, comes out 13 points above micro1, filed under Screening: 49 against 36 under rubric v1.0. micro1 takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 6 for Jack & Jill, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Jack & Jill 62, micro1 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 55% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, micro1 under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only micro1 is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordJack & Jillmicro1
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersGBUS
Founded20252022

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 51% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Jack & Jill 62 · micro1 20

    7.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill

  2. 12% weight · 69% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Jack & Jill 48 · micro1 25

    2.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill

  3. 20% weight · 77% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Jack & Jill 44 · micro1 50

    1.2 weighted points to micro1

  4. 12% weight · 85% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Jack & Jill 58 · micro1 48

    1.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill

  5. 15% weight · 91% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Jack & Jill 28 · micro1 22

    0.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Jack & Jill 56 · micro1 45

    0.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill

  7. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Jack & Jill 48 · micro1 45

    0.4 weighted points to Jack & Jill

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +13 beside that +12.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Jack & Jill minus micro1.

CategoryWeightJack & Jillmicro1Δ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%4450-6-1.2
Bias Audit Transparency18%6220+42+7.6
FRIA Support15%2822+6+0.9
Data Governance Disclosure15%4845+3+0.4
Human Oversight Design12%5848+10+1.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%4825+23+2.8
Customer Documentation8%5645+11+0.9
Total100%49 (F)36 (F)+13+12.6

§ 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 & Jillmicro1
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 domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11Audit reportSources on a separate domain12Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%71Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%80Sources on the vendor's own domain70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain22Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%315Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain258Sources 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; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and micro1 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 Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Jack & Jill last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
micro1 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.