§ The result
Criteria leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Criteria finishes 20 points clear of Emi under rubric v1.0 — 53 against 33 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. Criteria takes all 7 criteria and Emi none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Criteria 32 to Emi 25. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Criteria 68, Emi 28, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 39% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Criteria
Criteria is a pre-employment assessment platform offering scientifically validated cognitive aptitude, personality, emotional-intelligence and skills tests, plus structured and AI-assisted interview tools, used to evaluate and rank job candidates.
Vendor profile
Emi
Emi runs AI agents on WhatsApp, SMS and Messenger that screen and score frontline job applicants against employer-set criteria, schedule interviews, and collect hiring documents and check them against Mexican government databases.
§ The record
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Emi under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Criteria is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Criteria | Emi |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | AR |
| Founded | 2006 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Emi 28
8.0 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Emi 18
5.4 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Emi 44
2.7 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Emi 44
1.4 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Emi 25
1.1 weighted points to Criteria
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · Emi 48
1.0 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · Emi 35
0.8 weighted points to Criteria
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +20.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 20.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +20 beside that +20.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Emi.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Emi | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 28 | +40 | +8.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 18 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 44 | +18 | +2.7 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 44 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 33 (F) | +20 | +20.4 |
§ 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 | Criteria | Emi | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Emi sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Emi 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