§ The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads Jack & Jill by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Workday Recruiting AI, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 56 and Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing, on 49, 7 points apart. Workday Recruiting AI leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Jack & Jill leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Jack & Jill 44, Workday Recruiting AI 70 — and at a 20% weight it carries 59% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI holds across the 5 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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
§ The record
Jack & Jill is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Workday Recruiting AI under ATS-integrated 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 | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2025 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Jack & Jill 44 · Workday Recruiting AI 70
5.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Jack & Jill 48 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Jack & Jill 28 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.1 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Jack & Jill 48 · Workday Recruiting AI 55
1.1 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Jack & Jill 58 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.8 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Jack & Jill 56 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.7 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Jack & Jill 62 · Workday Recruiting AI 60
0.4 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Jack & Jill minus Workday Recruiting AI.
| Category | Weight | Jack & Jill | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 44 | 70 | -26 | -5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 35 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 65 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 35 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 65 | -9 | -0.7 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 56 (F) | -7 | -6.9 |
§ 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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 | 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 the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 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 | 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 | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources 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; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 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 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Jack & Jill last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI 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