§ The result
Teamtailor leads Keka on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under ATS-integrated, Teamtailor and Keka come out 47 and 37 under rubric v1.0, 10 points in favour of Teamtailor. Teamtailor leads every one of the 7 criteria, Keka none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Post-Market Monitoring, Keka 40 to Teamtailor 42. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Keka 30, Teamtailor 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Keka
Keka is an HR and payroll suite whose Keka Hire ATS scores each applicant against recruiter-defined role requirements and runs an AI screening conversation that decides which candidates reach the shortlist.
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
Keka and Teamtailor are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Keka | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | SE |
| Founded | 2014 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Keka 30 · Teamtailor 50
4.0 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Keka 20 · Teamtailor 30
1.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Keka 30 · Teamtailor 42
1.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Keka 50 · Teamtailor 58
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Keka 55 · Teamtailor 62
0.6 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Keka 50 · Teamtailor 54
0.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Keka 40 · Teamtailor 42
0.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Keka minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Keka | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 50 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 30 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 47 (F) | -10 | -10.1 |
§ 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 | Keka | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Keka has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 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 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Keka, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Keka 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