§ The result
SmartRecruiters leads Jack & Jill on 6 of the 7 criteria.
SmartRecruiters, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 13 points above Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing: 62 (D) against 49 (F) under rubric v1.0. Jack & Jill is ahead on none of the 7 criteria: SmartRecruiters takes 6, the remaining criterion is level, and the nearest of those 6 is Human Oversight Design, Jack & Jill 58 to SmartRecruiters 62. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Jack & Jill 44, SmartRecruiters 70, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 38% of the weighted advantage SmartRecruiters holds across the 6 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
SmartRecruiters
SmartRecruiters is an enterprise applicant tracking system and talent acquisition suite whose AI layer (the Winston assistant plus SmartAssistant/Winston Match) screens, ranks, and matches candidates to requisitions to support recruiter decisions.
§ The record
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, SmartRecruiters under ATS-integrated 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 | SmartRecruiters |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · SmartRecruiters 70
5.2 weighted points to SmartRecruiters
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · SmartRecruiters 78
2.9 weighted points to SmartRecruiters
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · SmartRecruiters 45
2.5 weighted points to SmartRecruiters
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · SmartRecruiters 62
2.1 weighted points to SmartRecruiters
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · SmartRecruiters 63
0.6 weighted points to SmartRecruiters
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · SmartRecruiters 62
0.5 weighted points to SmartRecruiters
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -13.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -13.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus SmartRecruiters.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | SmartRecruiters | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 70 | -26 | -5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 78 | -16 | -2.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 45 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 48 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 63 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 62 (D) | -13 | -13.8 |
§ 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 | SmartRecruiters | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 11 | 2 | 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; SmartRecruiters has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and SmartRecruiters sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 13 for SmartRecruiters, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SmartRecruiters last reviewed
- June 7, 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