§ The result
ZipRecruiter leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under Sourcing, ZipRecruiter and Moonhub come out 40 and 30 under rubric v1.0, 10 points in favour of ZipRecruiter. ZipRecruiter takes all 7 criteria from Moonhub without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is FRIA Support, Moonhub 25 to ZipRecruiter 27. The advantage ZipRecruiter holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Moonhub 22, ZipRecruiter 40, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 23% of the weighted points ZipRecruiter gains 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
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
Moonhub and ZipRecruiter are both filed under Candidate sourcing 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 | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Moonhub 22 · ZipRecruiter 40
2.2 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Moonhub 30 · ZipRecruiter 40
2.0 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Moonhub 40 · ZipRecruiter 52
1.8 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Moonhub 38 · ZipRecruiter 54
1.3 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
18% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Moonhub 18 · ZipRecruiter 24
1.1 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Moonhub 48 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.8 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Moonhub 25 · ZipRecruiter 27
0.3 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -9.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -9.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Moonhub minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Moonhub | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 24 | -6 | -1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 52 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 55 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 22 | 40 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 54 | -16 | -1.3 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 40 (F) | -10 | -9.5 |
§ 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 | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 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% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources 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% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 5 | Sources 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; 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 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 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