§ The result
Jack & Jill leads SeekOut on all 7 criteria.
The Sourcing cohort pairing of Jack & Jill and SeekOut comes out 49 to 34 under rubric v1.0, a 15-point lead for Jack & Jill. Jack & Jill leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; SeekOut leads none. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Jack & Jill 48, SeekOut 25) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Jack & Jill 62, SeekOut 40), 28% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill builds across the 7 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
SeekOut
Sourcing platform aggregating public profile data into a searchable talent index, with AI-assisted candidate matching and outreach.
§ The record
Jack & Jill and SeekOut are both filed under Candidate sourcing 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 | SeekOut |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 28% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · SeekOut 40
4.0 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · SeekOut 25
2.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · SeekOut 35
1.9 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · SeekOut 35
1.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · SeekOut 35
1.7 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · SeekOut 45
1.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · SeekOut 25
0.4 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +14.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +14.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus SeekOut.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | SeekOut | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 35 | +9 | +1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 40 | +22 | +4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 25 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 35 | +13 | +1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 25 | +23 | +2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 35 | +21 | +1.7 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 34 (F) | +15 | +14.2 |
§ 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 | SeekOut | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 5 | 4 | Sources 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; SeekOut has 9 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 5 with a source URL, 4 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 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 9 for SeekOut, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SeekOut last reviewed
- May 21, 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