HiredScore

AI-driven talent orchestration layer that ranks and routes candidates within an existing ATS. Acquired by Workday in 2024.
SourcingATS-integrated

HireAIScore rates HiredScore 52 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed May 21, 2026. HiredScore ranks 22 of 86 vendors rated in Candidate sourcing AI, against a category average of 46. That score is drawn from 9 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for HiredScore — 7 with a cited source, 2 recording that nothing was located.

Score breakdown

HiredScore, criterion by criterion

Each rubric criterion is scored out of 100 on the cited evidence, then weighted into the total.

Weighted contribution shown to the right of each bar.

  1. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Weight 20% · avg 48

    65

    +13.0

  2. Bias Audit Transparency

    Weight 18% · avg 40

    55

    +9.9

  3. FRIA Support

    Weight 15% · avg 31

    30

    +4.5

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    Weight 15% · avg 53

    55

    +8.3

  5. Human Oversight Design

    Weight 12% · avg 56

    60

    +7.2

  6. Post-Market Monitoring

    Weight 12% · avg 40

    35

    +4.2

  7. Customer Documentation

    Weight 8% · avg 57

    60

    +4.8

Total weighted score

51.8(rounded to 52 for display)

Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 86 Candidate sourcing AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.

Strongest criterion

Article 11 Technical Documentation

65raw / 100

Contributes 13.0 to the total. 65 against a 48 category average.

Weakest criterion

FRIA Support

30raw / 100

Contributes 4.5 to the total. 30 against a 31 category average.

Cited evidence

The evidence behind the score

Every score is backed by at least one cited piece of evidence. Open a criterion to see what was found, when, and where.

Download diligence record

Evidence ledger

Items
9
Documentation
6
Audit report
1
Absence
2
With a source URL
7 of 9
Source hostnames
1
Fewest items
1
Bias Audit Transparency

These figures measure how thoroughly HiredScore was reviewed, not how HiredScore performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.

Article 11 Technical Documentation

3 items65

Bias Audit Transparency

1 item55

FRIA Support

1 item30
  • AbsenceCaptured May 21, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-05-21.

    Where we looked: No FRIA template located, https://www.workday.com/en-us/legal/responsible-ai-and-bias-mitigation.html - no deployer FRIA materials.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Data Governance Disclosure

1 item55

Human Oversight Design

1 item60

Post-Market Monitoring

1 item35
  • AbsenceCaptured May 21, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-05-21.

    Where we looked: https://www.workday.com/en-us/legal/responsible-ai-and-bias-mitigation.html - no vendor-specific incident channel beyond general Workday surfaces.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Customer Documentation

1 item60

Editorial notes

Company overview

HiredScore is an AI-driven talent-orchestration layer that sits on top of an existing ATS. Its core function is ranking incoming applicants and routing them through configurable workflows. Workday acquired HiredScore in 2024; the product continues to be sold and developed, and is also being integrated into Workday Recruiting AI features.

Regulatory exposure

Candidate ranking is squarely inside EU AI Act Annex III §4 - high-risk. NYC LL 144 applies whenever HiredScore's ranking decisions affect NYC candidates. Because HiredScore is now part of Workday, customers should also pay attention to how Workday's responsible-AI documentation maps onto the HiredScore product surface - disclosures that apply to "Workday" do not automatically apply to HiredScore.

Path to a higher score

To move into the B band on this rubric, HiredScore would need to publish (a) a current NYC LL 144 bias audit for the ranking and routing flows, (b) a model card for the ranking model with subgroup performance metrics, and (c) clear delineation of which Workday-level responsible-AI documents apply to the HiredScore product specifically.

Regulatory frame

What applies to candidate sourcing AI.

Ranking outputs are inside Annex III §4 when they influence hiring decisions. GDPR Article 22 (automated decision-making) and the GDPR rights around profiling apply independently for EU candidates.

Keep reading

All sourcing vendorsHow this score is builtAnnex IV section-by-section: what AI hiring vendors must documentWhat makes a defensible NYC LL 144 bias audit

Compare

HiredScore against its nearest-scoring peers.

The closest scores in Candidate sourcing AI, side by side.

Build any comparison

Ranking

Others rated in Candidate sourcing AI

Ranked 22 of 86 by weighted total under rubric v1.0. The ordering is arithmetic on the rubric and carries no view on which tool suits a given hiring process.

  1. #19SEEK54F
  2. #20SAP SuccessFactors Recruiting53F
  3. #21Phenom52F
  4. #22HiredScoreThis profile52F
  5. #23Wellfound52F
  6. #24Textkernel51F
All sourcing vendors

Conflicts of interest

No vendor pays for placement, scoring, or removal. Casework - the consulting firm that operates this directory - provides paid services to some vendors. Any active or recent (within 24 months) commercial relationship is disclosed on the affected vendor profile and the review is reassigned to an independent reviewer. See the full policy on About.

Casework has no commercial relationship with this vendor.