§ The result
Retorio leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Retorio sits 14 points above Moonhub under rubric v1.0 — 44 against 30 — with Retorio filed under Assessment and Moonhub under Sourcing. Retorio leads every one of the 7 criteria, Moonhub none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Moonhub 48 to Retorio 52. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Bias Audit Transparency (Moonhub 18, Retorio 40) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Moonhub 30, Retorio 50), the second being 30% of the weighted advantage Retorio 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
Retorio
Video-based AI that analyses words, voice, and facial expression/body language to infer Big Five (OCEAN) personality and behavioural traits.
§ The record
Moonhub is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Retorio 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 Retorio is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Moonhub | Retorio |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | DE |
| Founded | 2022 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Moonhub 30 · Retorio 50
4.0 weighted points to Retorio
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Moonhub 18 · Retorio 40
4.0 weighted points to Retorio
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Moonhub 40 · Retorio 52
1.8 weighted points to Retorio
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Moonhub 22 · Retorio 33
1.3 weighted points to Retorio
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Moonhub 38 · Retorio 50
1.0 weighted points to Retorio
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Moonhub 25 · Retorio 30
0.8 weighted points to Retorio
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Moonhub 48 · Retorio 52
0.5 weighted points to Retorio
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -13.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Moonhub minus Retorio.
| Category | Weight | Moonhub | Retorio | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 50 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 40 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 52 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 22 | 33 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 44 (F) | -14 | -13.3 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Moonhub | Retorio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | 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 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Retorio has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Retorio sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains, and 22 for Retorio, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Retorio 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.
§ Where next