§ The result
Ashby leads Workstream on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Ashby (ATS-integrated) opens a 17-point lead on Workstream (Screening), 56 to 39. Ashby takes all 7 criteria and Workstream none of them; the nearest contest is Human Oversight Design, Ashby 62 to Workstream 61. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ashby 62, Workstream 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
Vendor profile
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Workstream under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Scheduling.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Workstream is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Workstream 20
7.6 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Workstream 40
4.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Workstream 27
2.3 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Workstream 47
1.6 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Workstream 35
0.8 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Workstream 56
0.6 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Workstream 61
0.1 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +17.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +17 beside that +17.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 40 | +23 | +4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 20 | +42 | +7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 27 | +15 | +2.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 47 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 61 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 56 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 39 (F) | +17 | +17.6 |
§ 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 | Ashby | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream 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