§ The result
Teamtailor leads JobDiva on all 7 criteria.
The ATS-integrated cohort pairing of Teamtailor and JobDiva comes out 47 to 29 under rubric v1.0, an 18-point lead for Teamtailor. Teamtailor leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; JobDiva leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (JobDiva 28, Teamtailor 50, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 25% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
JobDiva
JobDiva is an all-in-one ATS, CRM, onboarding, back-office and VMS-synchronization platform for staffing agencies, with AI features including DivaMatch candidate-to-job scoring, AI-enhanced matching and semantic search, resume harvesting and generative outreach.
Vendor profile
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
JobDiva and Teamtailor are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Teamtailor is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | JobDiva | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2003 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
JobDiva 28 · Teamtailor 50
4.4 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 42% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
JobDiva 22 · Teamtailor 42
3.0 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
JobDiva 38 · Teamtailor 58
3.0 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
JobDiva 15 · Teamtailor 30
2.7 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
JobDiva 40 · Teamtailor 54
1.7 weighted points to Teamtailor
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
JobDiva 42 · Teamtailor 62
1.6 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
JobDiva 30 · Teamtailor 42
1.4 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -18 beside that -17.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is JobDiva minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | JobDiva | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 50 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 15 | 30 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 40 | 54 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 42 | 62 | -20 | -1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 29 (F) | 47 (F) | -18 | -17.8 |
§ 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 | JobDiva | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 2 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
JobDiva has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for JobDiva, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- JobDiva last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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