§ The result
UKG leads Recruiterflow by 8 points.
Inside the ATS-integrated cohort, rubric v1.0 puts UKG on 44 and Recruiterflow on 36, 8 points apart. Recruiterflow takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 5 for UKG, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The advantage UKG holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Recruiterflow 33, UKG 48, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 36% of the weighted points UKG gains across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Recruiterflow
Recruiterflow is an ATS and CRM for recruiting agencies and executive search firms. Its AIRA AI layer ranks candidates already in a firm's database against each job with an explainable 0–100 Criteria Score (AIRA Matchmaker, shown as the 'AI Matches' card), and adds natural-language candidate search, external profile sourcing and an AI call notetaker that fills in interview scorecards.
Vendor profile
UKG
UKG is an enterprise HCM and workforce-management suite whose UKG Pro Recruiting applicant-tracking module, augmented by the embedded Bryte AI layer, drafts job descriptions and produces profile-match candidate scores to rank and shortlist applicants.
§ The record
Recruiterflow and UKG are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only UKG is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Recruiterflow | UKG |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2020 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Recruiterflow 33 · UKG 48
3.0 weighted points to UKG
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Recruiterflow 18 · UKG 30
2.2 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Recruiterflow 44 · UKG 56
1.8 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Recruiterflow 30 · UKG 35
0.8 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Recruiterflow 58 · UKG 52
0.7 weighted points to Recruiterflow
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Recruiterflow 33 · UKG 38
0.6 weighted points to UKG
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Recruiterflow 56 · UKG 55
0.1 weighted points to Recruiterflow
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Recruiterflow minus UKG.
| Category | Weight | Recruiterflow | UKG | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 48 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 30 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 56 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 33 | 38 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 55 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 36 (F) | 44 (F) | -8 | -7.5 |
§ 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 | Recruiterflow | UKG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 2 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 25 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Recruiterflow has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 6 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 45 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Recruiterflow, across 1 distinct source domain, and 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Recruiterflow 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.
§ Where next