§ The result
Criteria takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
Criteria sits 12 points above Manatal under rubric v1.0 — 53 against 41 — with Criteria filed under Assessment and Manatal under ATS-integrated. Manatal leads more of the criteria than Criteria — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which Criteria leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Criteria. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Criteria 68, Manatal 33 — and at a 20% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage Criteria holds across the 3 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
Manatal
Cloud-based applicant tracking system and recruitment CRM for agencies and HR teams, featuring an AI engine that scores and ranks candidates against job requirements and an asynchronous AI video Interviewer.
§ The record
Criteria is filed under Assessment AI, Manatal under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Criteria | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | TH |
| Founded | 2006 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Criteria 68 · Manatal 33
7.0 weighted points to Criteria
18% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Criteria 48 · Manatal 22
4.7 weighted points to Criteria
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Criteria 62 · Manatal 52
1.5 weighted points to Criteria
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Criteria 56 · Manatal 60
0.5 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Criteria 60 · Manatal 62
0.2 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Criteria 32 · Manatal 33
0.1 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Criteria 42 · Manatal 43
0.1 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Criteria minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | Criteria | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 68 | 33 | +35 | +7.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 48 | 22 | +26 | +4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 60 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 43 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 53 (F) | 41 (F) | +12 | +12.3 |
§ 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 | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Criteria has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 18 for Criteria, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Criteria last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Manatal last reviewed
- July 17, 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