§ The result
Willo leads Moonhub on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Willo sits 11 points above Moonhub under rubric v1.0 — 41 against 30 — with Willo filed under Video interview and Moonhub under Sourcing. Willo leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Moonhub is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Willo leads is Article 11 Technical Documentation, Moonhub 30 to Willo 38. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Customer Documentation (Moonhub 38, Willo 54) and Bias Audit Transparency at 18% (Moonhub 18, Willo 30), the second being 21% of the weighted advantage Willo holds across the 6 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
Willo
Willo is a browser-based asynchronous (one-way) video interview platform that lets employers collect recorded video, audio, multiple-choice and written candidate responses, then uses AI to transcribe, summarize, rank candidates against employer-defined "Blueprint" criteria, and flag scripted or AI-generated answers.
§ The record
Moonhub is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Willo under Video interview 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 Willo is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Moonhub | Willo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2022 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 21% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Moonhub 18 · Willo 30
2.2 weighted points to Willo
15% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Moonhub 40 · Willo 53
1.9 weighted points to Willo
12% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Moonhub 48 · Willo 62
1.7 weighted points to Willo
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Moonhub 22 · Willo 36
1.7 weighted points to Willo
20% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Moonhub 30 · Willo 38
1.6 weighted points to Willo
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Moonhub 38 · Willo 54
1.3 weighted points to Willo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -10.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -10.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Moonhub minus Willo.
| Category | Weight | Moonhub | Willo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 38 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 30 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 53 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 22 | 36 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 54 | -16 | -1.3 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 41 (F) | -11 | -10.3 |
§ 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 | Willo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 5 | 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; Willo has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 27 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Willo, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Willo 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