§ The result
Pinpoint leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 27 points between Pinpoint (ATS-integrated) and Moonhub (Sourcing): 57 for Pinpoint, 30 for Moonhub. Pinpoint leads every one of the 7 criteria and 5 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Moonhub leads none. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Moonhub 30, Pinpoint 72, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 32% of the weighted advantage Pinpoint holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
Vendor profile
Pinpoint
Pinpoint is an applicant tracking system for in-house talent teams that layers AI-assisted screening onto core hiring workflows - candidate match scores, AI filters, anonymized screening, an interview notetaker, and a hiring copilot for outreach and rejections.
§ The record
Moonhub is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Pinpoint under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Moonhub | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | JE |
| Founded | 2022 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Moonhub 30 · Pinpoint 72
8.4 weighted points to Pinpoint
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Moonhub 18 · Pinpoint 42
4.3 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Moonhub 40 · Pinpoint 68
4.2 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Moonhub 22 · Pinpoint 52
3.6 weighted points to Pinpoint
8% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Moonhub 38 · Pinpoint 66
2.2 weighted points to Pinpoint
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Moonhub 25 · Pinpoint 38
1.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Moonhub 48 · Pinpoint 64
1.9 weighted points to Pinpoint
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -26.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 26.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -27 beside that -26.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Moonhub minus Pinpoint.
| Category | Weight | Moonhub | Pinpoint | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 72 | -42 | -8.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 42 | -24 | -4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 68 | -28 | -4.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 64 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 22 | 52 | -30 | -3.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 66 | -28 | -2.2 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 57 (F) | -27 | -26.6 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | Pinpoint | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 18 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Pinpoint has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 33 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Pinpoint, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pinpoint 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