§ The result
3 points separate Jack & Jill and RippleMatch.
Under rubric v1.0, Jack & Jill and RippleMatch finish 3 points apart, 49 to 46, as two Sourcing entries. The 7 criteria split 4 to 3 in favour of Jack & Jill: Jack & Jill is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and RippleMatch on Article 11 Technical Documentation. Jack & Jill takes the heaviest weighted swing, Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Jack & Jill 62, RippleMatch 53), which is 50% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Post-Market Monitoring, Jack & Jill 48 to RippleMatch 37.
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
RippleMatch
RippleMatch is an early-career recruiting platform that sources students and recent graduates for employers' roles, ranks applicants with a 0-100 Fit Score built from criteria the recruiter configures, and adds verified skill badges, applicant review, interview scheduling and campus-event tools.
§ The record
Jack & Jill and RippleMatch 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 | RippleMatch |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · RippleMatch 53
1.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · RippleMatch 37
1.3 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · RippleMatch 46
0.4 weighted points to RippleMatch
8% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · RippleMatch 60
0.3 weighted points to RippleMatch
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · RippleMatch 50
0.3 weighted points to RippleMatch
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · RippleMatch 27
0.1 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · RippleMatch 57
0.1 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus RippleMatch.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | RippleMatch | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 46 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 53 | +9 | +1.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 27 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 50 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 37 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 46 (F) | +3 | +2.2 |
§ 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 | RippleMatch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| 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 | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 35 | 7 | Audit 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; RippleMatch has 42 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and RippleMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 78 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 42 for RippleMatch, across 5 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- RippleMatch 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