§ The result
4 points separate UKG and ZipRecruiter.
UKG (ATS-integrated) edges ZipRecruiter (Sourcing) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 44 to 40. ZipRecruiter takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 5 for UKG, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (UKG 48, ZipRecruiter 40, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage UKG holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
UKG is filed under ATS-integrated AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing 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 | UKG | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2020 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
UKG 48 · ZipRecruiter 40
1.6 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 54% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
UKG 35 · ZipRecruiter 27
1.2 weighted points to UKG
18% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
UKG 30 · ZipRecruiter 24
1.1 weighted points to UKG
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
UKG 56 · ZipRecruiter 52
0.6 weighted points to UKG
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
UKG 52 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.4 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
UKG 38 · ZipRecruiter 40
0.2 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
UKG 55 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.1 weighted points to UKG
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.2 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 +4.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is UKG minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | UKG | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 48 | 40 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 24 | +6 | +1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 27 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 40 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 54 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 40 (F) | +4 | +4.0 |
§ 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 | UKG | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 0 | 2 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 0 | 2 | — | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 8 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
UKG has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 14 for UKG, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- UKG last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter last reviewed
- September 25, 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