§ The result
4 points separate Spark Hire and Jack & Jill.
Spark Hire (Video interview) edges Jack & Jill (Sourcing) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 53 to 49. Spark Hire leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Jack & Jill leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Jack & Jill 44, Spark Hire 58) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 47% of the weighted advantage Spark Hire holds across the 5 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
Spark Hire
Spark Hire is a hiring platform combining one-way (async) and live video interviewing with an applicant tracking system (via its Comeet acquisition), and adds AI features that score and rank candidates' resumes and one-way video responses to help recruiters prioritize submissions.
§ The record
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Spark Hire under Video interview 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. Only Spark Hire is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Jack & Jill | Spark Hire |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · Spark Hire 58
2.8 weighted points to Spark Hire
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Spark Hire 60
1.8 weighted points to Spark Hire
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Spark Hire 38
1.2 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Spark Hire 64
0.6 weighted points to Spark Hire
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · Spark Hire 62
0.5 weighted points to Spark Hire
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · Spark Hire 30
0.3 weighted points to Spark Hire
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Spark Hire.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Spark Hire | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 58 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 38 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 64 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 53 (F) | -4 | -4.8 |
§ 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 | Spark Hire | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 16 | 4 | 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; Spark Hire has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Jack & Jill and Spark Hire sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Spark Hire, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Spark Hire 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