§ The result
3 points separate ZipRecruiter and Loxo.
Under rubric v1.0, ZipRecruiter and Loxo finish 3 points apart, 40 to 37, as two Sourcing entries. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of ZipRecruiter, with 1 level: ZipRecruiter is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Loxo on FRIA Support. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Loxo 30, ZipRecruiter 40 — and at a 20% weight it carries 55% of the weighted advantage ZipRecruiter holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Loxo
Loxo is an AI-native talent-intelligence platform that combines candidate sourcing, a recruiting CRM, and an applicant tracking system, using proprietary ranking models and a self-built talent graph of 800M+ people to source, rank, and match candidates for recruiting and staffing firms.
Vendor profile
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
Loxo and ZipRecruiter are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only ZipRecruiter is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Loxo | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Loxo 30 · ZipRecruiter 40
2.0 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
18% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Loxo 20 · ZipRecruiter 24
0.7 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Loxo 50 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Loxo 30 · ZipRecruiter 27
0.4 weighted points to Loxo
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Loxo 58 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.3 weighted points to Loxo
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Loxo 50 · ZipRecruiter 52
0.3 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.4 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 -2.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Loxo minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Loxo | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 24 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 52 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 54 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 40 (F) | -3 | -2.8 |
§ 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 | Loxo | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 12 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Loxo has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Loxo, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Loxo last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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.
§ Where next