§ The result
Cegid leads Workstream by 6 points.
Cegid scores 45 and Workstream 39 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Workstream takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 6 for Cegid, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Cegid 50, Workstream 40, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 29% of the weighted advantage Cegid holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cegid
Cegid's HR suite offers two recruiting lines: Cegid HR Talent Acquisition (ex-DigitalRecruiters), an ATS/CRM with CV parsing, scorecards, automated scoring and an AI conversational agent that pre-qualifies candidates on career sites and WhatsApp, and Cegid Talentsoft (now sold as Cegid HR Suite) recruiting, whose 'Recruiting Match' matches positions to candidates algorithmically.
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
Cegid 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 | Cegid | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Workstream 40
2.0 weighted points to Cegid
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Workstream 20
1.8 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Workstream 47
1.2 weighted points to Cegid
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Workstream 27
0.8 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Workstream 61
0.7 weighted points to Workstream
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Workstream 35
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Workstream 56
0.5 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 27 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 47 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 61 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 56 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 39 (F) | +6 | +6.1 |
§ 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 | Cegid | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 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% | 6 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 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 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 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