§ The result
Jack & Jill leads Recruit CRM by 9 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing, finishes on 49 and Recruit CRM, filed under ATS-integrated, on 40, 9 points apart. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to Jack & Jill and Recruit CRM, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Jack & Jill holds, headed by Bias Audit Transparency, settle the total. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Jack & Jill 62, Recruit CRM 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 74% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds across the 3 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
Recruit CRM
Recruit CRM is an ATS and CRM for recruitment agencies and executive search firms, with AI resume parsing, AI sourcing from an 800M+ profile Global Database, and AI candidate matching that scores and ranks candidates 0–100 with explanations for each dimension.
§ The record
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Recruit CRM under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Jack & Jill is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Jack & Jill | Recruit CRM |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · Recruit CRM 20
7.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · Recruit CRM 34
2.0 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · Recruit CRM 34
0.9 weighted points to Recruit CRM
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Recruit CRM 54
0.9 weighted points to Recruit CRM
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Recruit CRM 42
0.7 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Recruit CRM 60
0.3 weighted points to Recruit CRM
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +8.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.4 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 +8.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Recruit CRM.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Recruit CRM | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 34 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 20 | +42 | +7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 34 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 54 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 40 (F) | +9 | +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.
| Criterion | Weight | Jack & Jill | Recruit CRM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 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 | 6 | 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 | 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 | 30 | 5 | Sources 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; Recruit CRM has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and Recruit CRM sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 71 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 35 for Recruit CRM, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruit CRM 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