§ The result
Teamtailor leads Pin by 7 points.
Teamtailor scores 47 and Pin 40 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Teamtailor: Teamtailor is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Pin on Bias Audit Transparency. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Pin 30, Teamtailor 50) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 50% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 5 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
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
§ The record
Pin is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Pin | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | SE |
| Founded | 2024 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pin 30 · Teamtailor 50
4.0 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Pin 30 · Teamtailor 42
1.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Pin 50 · Teamtailor 58
1.2 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pin 35 · Teamtailor 30
0.9 weighted points to Pin
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pin 55 · Teamtailor 62
0.6 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pin 50 · Teamtailor 54
0.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pin 45 · Teamtailor 42
0.4 weighted points to Pin
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -6.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -6.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Pin minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | Pin | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 50 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 30 | +5 | +0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 42 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 47 (F) | -7 | -6.8 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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 | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pin last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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