§ The result
LoopCV leads LockedIn AI by 23 points.
LoopCV finishes 23 points clear of LockedIn AI under rubric js-v1.0 — 50 against 27 — across the Auto-apply and Live interview cohorts. LoopCV leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Application Honesty, while LockedIn AI leads 1, including Data & Credential Safety. Application Honesty is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (LockedIn AI 12, LoopCV 55, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage LoopCV holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
LockedIn AI
LockedIn AI is a real-time interview copilot that listens to a job seeker's live interview, coding round or online assessment and displays AI-generated answers, code and coaching on their screen, alongside free resume, cover-letter and job-tracking tools.
Vendor profile
LoopCV
LoopCV is a job-search automation platform that continuously matches a job seeker's CV to postings across 30+ job boards and applies on their behalf via ATS form-fills, LinkedIn Easy Apply, and templated emails to recruiters.
§ The record
LockedIn AI is filed under Live interview assistance, LoopCV under Auto-apply tools. They also share 2 secondary categories: Resume AI and Tracker.
| Record | LockedIn AI | LoopCV |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Low |
| Headquarters | US | GR |
| Founded | 2024 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Application Honesty
LockedIn AI 12 · LoopCV 55
8.6 weighted points to LoopCV
15% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Employer & ATS Legitimacy
LockedIn AI 10 · LoopCV 38
4.2 weighted points to LoopCV
10% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Pricing & Cancellation Fairness
LockedIn AI 33 · LoopCV 65
3.2 weighted points to LoopCV
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
User Control & Transparency
LockedIn AI 40 · LoopCV 60
3.0 weighted points to LoopCV
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Effectiveness Evidence
LockedIn AI 10 · LoopCV 35
3.0 weighted points to LoopCV
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Support & Accountability
LockedIn AI 40 · LoopCV 68
2.2 weighted points to LoopCV
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data & Credential Safety
LockedIn AI 48 · LoopCV 40
1.6 weighted points to LockedIn AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -22.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -22.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is LockedIn AI minus LoopCV.
| Category | Weight | LockedIn AI | LoopCV | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Application Honesty | 20% | 12 | 55 | -43 | -8.6 |
| Data & Credential Safety | 20% | 48 | 40 | +8 | +1.6 |
| User Control & Transparency | 15% | 40 | 60 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Employer & ATS Legitimacy | 15% | 10 | 38 | -28 | -4.2 |
| Effectiveness Evidence | 12% | 10 | 35 | -25 | -3.0 |
| Pricing & Cancellation Fairness | 10% | 33 | 65 | -32 | -3.2 |
| Support & Accountability | 8% | 40 | 68 | -28 | -2.2 |
| Total | 100% | 27 (F) | 50 (F) | -23 | -22.6 |
§ 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 | LockedIn AI | LoopCV | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Application Honesty | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data & Credential Safety | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| User Control & Transparency | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Employer & ATS Legitimacy | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | — |
| Effectiveness Evidence | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | — |
| Pricing & Cancellation Fairness | 10% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Support & Accountability | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 26 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
LockedIn AI has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; LoopCV has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for LockedIn AI and LoopCV sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for LockedIn AI, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for LoopCV, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- js-v1.0
- LockedIn AI last reviewed
- September 4, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- LoopCV 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