§ The result
Jack & Jill leads Pin by 9 points.
Jack & Jill finishes 9 points ahead of Pin under rubric v1.0, 49 to 40, both scored as Sourcing entries. Pin takes 2 of the 7 criteria, FRIA Support among them, against 5 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, Pin 35 — and at an 18% weight it carries 54% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
§ The record
Jack & Jill and Pin 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.
| Record | Jack & Jill | Pin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 2024 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · Pin 35
4.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · Pin 30
2.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · Pin 50
1.0 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Pin 45
0.4 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · Pin 30
0.3 weighted points to Pin
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Pin 50
0.3 weighted points to Pin
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Pin 55
0.1 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +8.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Pin.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Pin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 30 | +14 | +2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 35 | +27 | +4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 50 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 45 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 40 (F) | +9 | +8.5 |
§ 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 | Pin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 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 | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | 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 | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 32 | 5 | 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; Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 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 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pin 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