§ The result
Jack & Jill leads Paylocity by 6 points.
Jack & Jill scores 49 and Paylocity 43 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and ATS-integrated cohorts. Jack & Jill and Paylocity each lead 3 of the 7 criteria, with 1 level, though the side of the split Jack & Jill holds (headed by Bias Audit Transparency) adds up to more weighted points. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Jack & Jill 62, Paylocity 33) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 76% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Paylocity
Paylocity is a cloud-based HCM and payroll platform whose talent suite includes an applicant tracking system with generative-AI job-description and invite drafting, one-way video interviews, candidate self-scheduling, and a conversational "AI Assistant."
§ The record
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Paylocity under ATS-integrated 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. Only Paylocity is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Jack & Jill | Paylocity |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · Paylocity 33
5.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · Paylocity 50
1.0 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Paylocity 54
0.9 weighted points to Paylocity
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Paylocity 42
0.7 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · Paylocity 30
0.3 weighted points to Paylocity
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Paylocity 58
0.2 weighted points to Paylocity
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +5.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Paylocity.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Paylocity | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 44 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 33 | +29 | +5.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 54 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 58 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 43 (F) | +6 | +5.5 |
§ 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 | Jack & Jill | Paylocity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 11 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Paylocity has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 18 for Paylocity, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paylocity last reviewed
- July 17, 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