HomeCompareLinkedIn Recruiter vs Plum

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

LinkedIn Recruiter vs Plum

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

3 points separate LinkedIn Recruiter and Plum.

LinkedIn Recruiter holds a 3-point edge over Plum under rubric v1.0, 57 to 54, across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of LinkedIn Recruiter: LinkedIn Recruiter is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Plum on Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Plum — LinkedIn Recruiter 50, Plum 83, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.

§ The record

LinkedIn Recruiter is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Plum under Assessment 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 Plum is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordLinkedIn RecruiterPlum
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersUSCA
Founded20022012

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 42% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    LinkedIn Recruiter 50 · Plum 83

    5.9 weighted points to Plum

  2. 20% weight · 55% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    LinkedIn Recruiter 67 · Plum 58

    1.8 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  3. 12% weight · 66% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    LinkedIn Recruiter 66 · Plum 52

    1.7 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  4. 12% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    LinkedIn Recruiter 50 · Plum 36

    1.7 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  5. 15% weight · 89% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    LinkedIn Recruiter 38 · Plum 28

    1.5 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  6. 15% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    LinkedIn Recruiter 62 · Plum 54

    1.2 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

  7. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    LinkedIn Recruiter 68 · Plum 63

    0.4 weighted points to LinkedIn Recruiter

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +2.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.3.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is LinkedIn Recruiter minus Plum.

CategoryWeightLinkedIn RecruiterPlumΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%6758+9+1.8
Bias Audit Transparency18%5083-33-5.9
FRIA Support15%3828+10+1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%6254+8+1.2
Human Oversight Design12%6652+14+1.7
Post-Market Monitoring12%5036+14+1.7
Customer Documentation8%6863+5+0.4
Total100%57 (F)54 (F)+3+2.3

§ 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.

CriterionWeightLinkedIn RecruiterPlum
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%41Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain01—
Data Governance Disclosure15%50Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%61Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%345Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain154Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain

LinkedIn Recruiter has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 34 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for LinkedIn Recruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for LinkedIn Recruiter, across 6 distinct source domains, and 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
LinkedIn Recruiter last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Plum 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.