§ The result
Tribepad leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 26 points between Tribepad (ATS-integrated) and Moonhub (Sourcing): 56 for Tribepad, 30 for Moonhub. Tribepad leads every one of the 7 criteria and 4 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Moonhub leads none. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Moonhub 18, Tribepad 78) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 42% of the weighted advantage Tribepad holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Tribepad
Tribepad is a UK applicant tracking system whose built-in Sidekick AI assistant scores and ranks applicants against recruiter-weighted skills and generates candidate summaries, SWOT analyses, job descriptions, salary suggestions and interview questions.
§ The record
Moonhub is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Tribepad 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 | Tribepad |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2022 | 2008 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Moonhub 18 · Tribepad 78
10.8 weighted points to Tribepad
20% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Moonhub 30 · Tribepad 56
5.2 weighted points to Tribepad
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Moonhub 22 · Tribepad 54
3.8 weighted points to Tribepad
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Moonhub 40 · Tribepad 56
2.4 weighted points to Tribepad
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Moonhub 38 · Tribepad 58
1.6 weighted points to Tribepad
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Moonhub 48 · Tribepad 58
1.2 weighted points to Tribepad
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Moonhub 25 · Tribepad 30
0.8 weighted points to Tribepad
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -25.8 — 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 -26 beside that -25.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Moonhub minus Tribepad.
| Category | Weight | Moonhub | Tribepad | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 56 | -26 | -5.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 78 | -60 | -10.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 56 | -16 | -2.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 22 | 54 | -32 | -3.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -1.6 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 56 (F) | -26 | -25.8 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | Tribepad | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 4 | 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; Tribepad has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Tribepad sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains, and 32 for Tribepad, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Tribepad 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