HomeCompareKeka vs RecruitBot

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Keka vs RecruitBot

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Keka and RecruitBot tie at 37.

Keka (ATS-integrated) and RecruitBot (Sourcing) tie at 37 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Keka leads 2 of the 7 criteria and RecruitBot 2, with 3 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Keka 30, RecruitBot 33) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 63% of the weighted advantage RecruitBot holds across the 2 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Keka is filed under ATS-integrated AI, RecruitBot under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Keka is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.

RecordKekaRecruitBot
Price tierLowMid
HeadquartersINUS
Founded20142017

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 35% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Keka 30 · RecruitBot 33

    0.6 weighted points to RecruitBot

  2. 15% weight · 61% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Keka 30 · RecruitBot 27

    0.4 weighted points to Keka

  3. 18% weight · 82% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Keka 20 · RecruitBot 22

    0.4 weighted points to RecruitBot

  4. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Keka 50 · RecruitBot 48

    0.3 weighted points to Keka

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 4 figures above sum to -0.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 1.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Keka minus RecruitBot.

CategoryWeightKekaRecruitBotΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3033-3-0.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%2022-2-0.4
FRIA Support15%3027+3+0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%5048+2+0.3
Human Oversight Design12%5050--
Post-Market Monitoring12%4040--
Customer Documentation8%5555--
Total100%37 (F)37 (F)--0.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightKekaRecruitBot
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Sources on the vendor's own domain31—
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%51Sources on the vendor's own domain60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%71Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%61Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%287Sources on the vendor's own domain256Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Keka has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; RecruitBot has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for RecruitBot sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Keka, across 1 distinct source domain, and 31 for RecruitBot, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Keka last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
RecruitBot last reviewed
September 25, 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.