HomeComparePin vs UKG

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Pin vs UKG

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

4 points separate UKG and Pin.

UKG holds a 4-point edge over Pin under rubric v1.0, 44 to 40, across the ATS-integrated and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 4 to 2 in favour of UKG, with 1 level: UKG is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Pin on Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Pin 30, UKG 48 — and at a 20% weight it carries 66% of the weighted advantage UKG holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Pin is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, UKG 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.

RecordPinUKG
Price tierLowEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20242020

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 50% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Pin 30 · UKG 48

    3.6 weighted points to UKG

  2. 18% weight · 62% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Pin 35 · UKG 30

    0.9 weighted points to Pin

  3. 15% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Pin 50 · UKG 56

    0.9 weighted points to UKG

  4. 12% weight · 86% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Pin 45 · UKG 38

    0.8 weighted points to Pin

  5. 15% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Pin 30 · UKG 35

    0.8 weighted points to UKG

  6. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Pin 50 · UKG 52

    0.2 weighted points to UKG

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -3.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.8.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Pin minus UKG.

CategoryWeightPinUKGΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3048-18-3.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%3530+5+0.9
FRIA Support15%3035-5-0.8
Data Governance Disclosure15%5056-6-0.9
Human Oversight Design12%5052-2-0.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%4538+7+0.8
Customer Documentation8%5555--
Total100%40 (F)44 (F)-4-3.8

§ 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.

CriterionWeightPinUKG
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain02—
FRIA Support15%31Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%70Sources on the vendor's own domain20Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%60Sources on the vendor's own domain02—
Post-Market Monitoring12%51Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%51Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%325Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain68Audit 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; UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Pin last reviewed
September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
UKG 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.