§ The result
1 point separates Radancy and Pin.
Under rubric v1.0, Radancy and Pin finish 1 point apart, 41 to 40, as two Sourcing entries. Radancy leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Pin leads 3, including Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing are the same criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, and Pin holds it (Pin 35, Radancy 20, 18% weight), worth 66% of the weighted advantage Pin builds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
Vendor profile
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
Pin and Radancy are both filed under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Scheduling.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Radancy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pin | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2024 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pin 35 · Radancy 20
2.7 weighted points to Pin
20% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pin 30 · Radancy 42
2.4 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pin 50 · Radancy 58
1.2 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pin 45 · Radancy 36
1.1 weighted points to Pin
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pin 50 · Radancy 57
0.8 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pin 55 · Radancy 60
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pin 30 · Radancy 28
0.3 weighted points to Pin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -0.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pin minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Pin | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 28 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 36 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 41 (F) | -1 | -0.8 |
§ 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 | Pin | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 32 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 59 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pin last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy last reviewed
- August 2, 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
Scored against