UKG
HireAIScore rates UKG 44 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed June 7, 2026. UKG ranks 51 of 77 vendors rated in ATS-integrated AI, against a category average of 47. That score is drawn from 14 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for UKG — 6 with a cited source, 8 recording that nothing was located.
Score breakdown
UKG, 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.
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Weight 20% · category avg 51
48
+9.6
Bias Audit Transparency
Weight 18% · category avg 41
30
+5.4
FRIA Support
Weight 15% · category avg 32
35
+5.3
Data Governance Disclosure
Weight 15% · category avg 54
56
+8.4
Human Oversight Design
Weight 12% · category avg 57
52
+6.2
Post-Market Monitoring
Weight 12% · category avg 42
38
+4.6
Customer Documentation
Weight 8% · category avg 59
55
+4.4
Total weighted score
43.9(rounded to 44 for display)
Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 77 ATS-integrated AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.
Strongest criterion
Data Governance Disclosure
56raw / 100
Contributes 8.4 to the total. 56 against a 54 category average.
Weakest criterion
Bias Audit Transparency
30raw / 100
Contributes 5.4 to the total. 30 against a 41 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 recordEvidence ledger
- Items
- 14
- Documentation
- 5
- Audit report
- 1
- Absence
- 8
- With a source URL
- 6 of 14
- Source hostnames
- 2
- Fewest items
- 2
- Article 11 Technical Documentation
These figures measure how thoroughly UKG was reviewed, not how UKG performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.
Article 11 Technical Documentation
2 items48
- DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG's SafeBase Trust Center lists a 'Responsible AI Statement,' 'Bryte AI Data Processing & Model Training' documents, and a 'UKG Statement on the EU AI Act,' but these AI-governance artifacts require a request/NDA flow and are not openly downloadable.
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
No openly published system/model card, explainability statement, or ISO 42001 certification for the Bryte AI candidate-scoring model was found; the UKG responsible-AI pages (www.ukg.com/company/responsibility/responsible-and-ethical-use-ai) are behind Cloudflare bot protection and return 403 to automated retrieval.
Bias Audit Transparency
2 items30
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG publicly states it tests models for bias before and after deployment with human monitoring (per its responsible-AI page, corroborated across search summaries), but provides no independent auditor, date, or downloadable audit report.
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
No public NYC Local Law 144 bias-audit summary or independent third-party algorithmic audit of UKG Pro Recruiting / Bryte candidate scoring was found via web search, the Trust Center, or auditor directories; unlike some peers (e.g., Eightfold AI), UKG does not publish bias-audit results.
FRIA Support
2 items35
- DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026
The Trust Center lists 'EU AI Act' under emerging regulations and a 'UKG Statement on the EU AI Act,' indicating partial deployer-facing AI-Act material, though gated behind the request flow.
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
No EU AI Act Article 27 FRIA template or explicit fundamental-rights / deployer-obligation guidance document was located on UKG's public site or Trust Center.
Data Governance Disclosure
2 items56
- Audit reportCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG's Trust Center hosts ISO/IEC 27001, 27017 and 27018 certificates, SOC 1/2/3 reports, GDPR/CCPA/EU-US DPF attestations, Data Processing Agreements, and Bryte AI data-processing/model-training documents.
- DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG publishes a 'Transfer Risk and Impact Statement' (downloadable PDF, confirmed genuine) covering cross-border data-transfer governance and safeguards under GDPR standard contractual clauses.
Human Oversight Design
2 items52
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG publicly states AI should support rather than make decisions, with human oversight and final approval, and that its AI explains recommendations clearly (responsible-AI page, corroborated across search summaries; page itself Cloudflare-blocked from direct fetch).
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
No documented in-product override controls, per-jurisdiction configuration toggles, audit-log features, or in-interface explanation UI for the Bryte candidate-scoring output were found in publicly accessible materials.
Post-Market Monitoring
2 items38
- DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG maintains a Trust Center and cybersecurity program providing security reports and a compliance/security contact surface for customers.
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
No public AI-model-update changelog, AI incident-reporting channel, or continuous bias/fairness monitoring dashboard for Bryte AI / Pro Recruiting was found; monitoring is described generically as internal model-drift testing.
Customer Documentation
2 items55
- DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG provides a customer-facing Trust Center with DPAs, certifications, privacy attestations, and AI-governance statements, plus public product and ESG/responsible-AI resource pages.
- AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026
UKG publishes HR-leader blog guidance on the EU AI Act ('an AI Game Changer') acknowledging high-risk hiring-AI classification, training-data quality, documentation, transparency and human-oversight obligations (www.ukg.com/blog/hr-leaders/european-union-artificial-intelligence-act-ai-game-changer; corroborated via search, page Cloudflare-blocked from direct fetch).
Editorial notes
Company overview
UKG (Ultimate Kronos Group) was formed on April 1, 2020 from the merger of Kronos Incorporated (founded 1977) and Ultimate Software (founded 1990), with dual U.S. headquarters in Lowell, Massachusetts and Weston, Florida. It is one of the largest human-capital-management and workforce-management vendors, serving thousands of enterprise customers. Within its UKG Pro suite, UKG Pro Recruiting provides applicant tracking, and the Bryte AI layer (launched 2023) adds generative AI assistance and profile-match candidate scoring. UKG positions Bryte as 'fair, inclusive, and secure by design,' trained on a large workforce dataset. As an enterprise SaaS HCM vendor sold via custom contracts, UKG sits firmly in the enterprise price tier.
Regulatory exposure
UKG's recruiting AI plausibly falls within scope of high-risk employment-AI regimes: candidate match scoring used to rank or shortlist applicants is the kind of tool covered by NYC Local Law 144 (AEDT) and is classified high-risk under Annex III of the EU AI Act, with parallel exposure under Illinois and Colorado law. UKG maintains an active responsible-AI program and an EU AI Act statement, and acknowledges the high-risk classification of hiring tools in its public HR-leader blog, but its concrete compliance artifacts (Responsible AI Statement, Bryte AI model-training documentation, EU AI Act statement) are gated behind its SafeBase Trust Center request flow rather than freely downloadable. No public NYC LL 144 third-party bias audit, no ISO 42001 certification, and no Article 27 FRIA template could be located. Because UKG is the AI provider while its employer customers are the deployers who must commission bias audits and FRIAs, the absence of freely available audit evidence shifts substantial verification burden onto deployers.
Path to a higher score
UKG could materially raise its score by ungating its responsible-AI artifacts: publish the Responsible AI Statement and Bryte AI model-training/data-governance documentation as open web pages or downloadable PDFs rather than behind the Trust Center request wall, and add an explainability/system-card document for the candidate-scoring model (Article 11-style instructions for use). The single highest-impact move is commissioning and publicly posting an independent NYC LL 144 bias audit of the recruiting match-scoring tool, ideally renewed annually, as peer ATS/matching vendors have done. Publishing an Article 27 FRIA template and explicit deployer-obligation guidance, and pursuing ISO 42001 certification, would close the remaining gaps.
Regulatory frame
What applies to ATS-integrated AI.
Ranking features are inside EU AI Act Annex III §4 (high-risk) and inside NYC Local Law 144 when they affect NYC-based candidates. Customers should treat the AI surface as a distinct deployer-FRIA scope from the rest of the ATS.
Compare
UKG against its nearest-scoring peers.
The closest scores in ATS-integrated AI, side by side.
- Side-by-sideUKG vs Vincere44F
- Side-by-sideUKG vs Prevue HR44F
- Side-by-sideUKG vs Fountain44F
- Side-by-sideUKG vs JazzHR44F
Ranking
Others rated in ATS-integrated AI
Ranked 51 of 77 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.
- #48Vincere44F
- #49Prevue HR44F
- #50Fountain44F
- #51UKGThis profile44F
- #52JazzHR44F
- #53BambooHR43F
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.