HomeCompareCeipal vs Workstream

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Ceipal vs Workstream

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

4 points separate Workstream and Ceipal.

Workstream (Screening) edges Ceipal (ATS-integrated) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 39 to 35. Ceipal takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Post-Market Monitoring among them, against 5 for Workstream, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation, at 20%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Workstream (Ceipal 30, Workstream 40), 45% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Human Oversight Design, Ceipal 46 to Workstream 61.

§ The record

Ceipal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Workstream under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Workstream is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCeipalWorkstream
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20152017

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 41% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Ceipal 30 · Workstream 40

    2.0 weighted points to Workstream

  2. 12% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Ceipal 46 · Workstream 61

    1.8 weighted points to Workstream

  3. 12% weight · 86% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Ceipal 38 · Workstream 35

    0.4 weighted points to Ceipal

  4. 15% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Ceipal 25 · Workstream 27

    0.3 weighted points to Workstream

  5. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Ceipal 53 · Workstream 56

    0.2 weighted points to Workstream

  6. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Ceipal 46 · Workstream 47

    0.1 weighted points to Workstream

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.9 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 -4.1.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Ceipal minus Workstream.

CategoryWeightCeipalWorkstreamΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3040-10-2.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%2020--
FRIA Support15%2527-2-0.3
Data Governance Disclosure15%4647-1-0.1
Human Oversight Design12%4661-15-1.8
Post-Market Monitoring12%3835+3+0.4
Customer Documentation8%5356-3-0.2
Total100%35 (F)39 (F)-4-4.1

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCeipalWorkstream
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%11—51Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain70Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%137Sources on the vendor's own domain286Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Ceipal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 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 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Ceipal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Ceipal last reviewed
July 17, 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.