§ The result
Darwinbox takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
Darwinbox finishes 5 points ahead of Manatal under rubric v1.0, 46 to 41, both scored as ATS-integrated entries. Manatal leads more of the criteria, 4 against 3 for Darwinbox, yet Darwinbox takes Article 11 Technical Documentation, which carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum with it. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Darwinbox 60, Manatal 33 — and at a 20% weight it carries 73% of the weighted advantage Darwinbox holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Darwinbox
Darwinbox is an enterprise HCM suite whose recruitment module uses Darwinbox Sense AI (now sold inside its Cortex agent platform) to parse resumes, stack-rank and recommend candidates with stated fit reasoning, run screening and shortlisting agents, and give candidates an assistant for job matching, interview details and FAQs.
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
Darwinbox and Manatal are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Manatal is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Darwinbox | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | IN | TH |
| Founded | 2015 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Darwinbox 60 · Manatal 33
5.4 weighted points to Darwinbox
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Darwinbox 28 · Manatal 22
1.1 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Darwinbox 35 · Manatal 43
1.0 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Darwinbox 58 · Manatal 52
0.9 weighted points to Darwinbox
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Darwinbox 55 · Manatal 60
0.6 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Darwinbox 30 · Manatal 33
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Darwinbox 57 · Manatal 62
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +5.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Darwinbox minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | Darwinbox | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 33 | +27 | +5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 22 | +6 | +1.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 52 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 43 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 57 | 62 | -5 | -0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 41 (F) | +5 | +5.0 |
§ 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 | Darwinbox | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 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% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Darwinbox has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 7 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 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 31 for Darwinbox, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Darwinbox last reviewed
- September 25, 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