§ The result
SEEK leads Teamtailor by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, SEEK, filed under Screening, finishes on 54 and Teamtailor, filed under ATS-integrated, on 47, 7 points apart. SEEK leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Teamtailor leads 1, including FRIA Support. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — SEEK 70, Teamtailor 50 — and at a 20% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage SEEK holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
SEEK
SEEK runs employment marketplaces in Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia (SEEK, Jobstreet and Jobsdb), and its seekAi employer tools label and rank applicants as 'high-fit' using a model trained on millions of past hirer shortlisting decisions, target job ads at predicted high-fit candidates, and run AI voice or text pre-screens, recommended shortlists and reference checks through a feature called Assist.
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
SEEK is filed under Screening AI, Teamtailor under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | SEEK | Teamtailor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | SE |
| Founded | 1997 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
SEEK 70 · Teamtailor 50
4.0 weighted points to SEEK
18% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
SEEK 40 · Teamtailor 30
1.8 weighted points to SEEK
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
SEEK 32 · Teamtailor 42
1.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
SEEK 62 · Teamtailor 54
1.0 weighted points to SEEK
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
SEEK 50 · Teamtailor 42
1.0 weighted points to SEEK
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
SEEK 60 · Teamtailor 58
0.3 weighted points to SEEK
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
SEEK 64 · Teamtailor 62
0.2 weighted points to SEEK
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.7 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 +6.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is SEEK minus Teamtailor.
| Category | Weight | SEEK | Teamtailor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 50 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 30 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 42 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 62 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 47 (F) | +7 | +6.7 |
§ 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 | SEEK | Teamtailor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 23 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
SEEK has 30 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for SEEK sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 30 for SEEK, across 3 distinct source domains, and 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- SEEK 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