§ The result
SEEK leads Jack & Jill by 5 points.
SEEK scores 54 and Jack & Jill 49 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. Jack & Jill takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for SEEK, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Jack & Jill 44, SEEK 70) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 58% of the weighted advantage SEEK holds across the 6 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
SEEK
SEEK runs employment marketplaces in Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia (SEEK, Jobstreet and Jobsdb), and its seekAi employer tools label and rank applicants as 'high-fit' using a model trained on millions of past hirer shortlisting decisions, target job ads at predicted high-fit candidates, and run AI voice or text pre-screens, recommended shortlists and reference checks through a feature called Assist.
§ The record
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, SEEK 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.
| Record | Jack & Jill | SEEK |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | AU |
| Founded | 2025 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · SEEK 70
5.2 weighted points to SEEK
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · SEEK 40
4.0 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · SEEK 60
1.8 weighted points to SEEK
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · SEEK 64
0.6 weighted points to SEEK
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · SEEK 32
0.6 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · SEEK 62
0.5 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · SEEK 50
0.2 weighted points to SEEK
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -5.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus SEEK.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | SEEK | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 70 | -26 | -5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 32 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 50 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 64 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 54 (F) | -5 | -5.0 |
§ 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 | SEEK | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 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 | 3 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 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; SEEK has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and SEEK sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 30 for SEEK, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SEEK 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