§ The result
Workable takes the total, Dover takes more of the criteria.
Workable (ATS-integrated) edges Dover (Sourcing) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 48 to 45. Dover leads more of the criteria than Workable — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which Workable leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Workable. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Dover 34, Workable 55 — and at a 20% weight it carries 71% of the weighted advantage Workable holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Dover
Dover is an AI recruiting platform for startups offering a free applicant tracking system, candidate sourcing via a LinkedIn/Copilot browser extension, OpenAI/Anthropic-powered 0-100 applicant scoring, and a fractional-recruiter marketplace.
Vendor profile
Workable
Workable is an all-in-one applicant tracking system and HR platform whose AI feature layer (Workable AI / Workable Agent) sources, screens, scores, and matches candidates and drafts recruiting content within the recruiting workflow.
§ The record
Dover is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Workable under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and NYC LL 144. Only Workable is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Dover | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Dover 34 · Workable 55
4.2 weighted points to Workable
18% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Dover 52 · Workable 42
1.8 weighted points to Dover
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Dover 50 · Workable 58
1.2 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Dover 30 · Workable 25
0.8 weighted points to Dover
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Dover 58 · Workable 62
0.5 weighted points to Workable
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Dover 60 · Workable 56
0.3 weighted points to Dover
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Dover 44 · Workable 42
0.2 weighted points to Dover
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Dover minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Dover | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 34 | 55 | -21 | -4.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 44 | 42 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 48 (F) | -3 | -2.8 |
§ 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 | Dover | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Dover has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Workable has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Dover and Workable sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Dover, across 3 distinct source domains, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Dover last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workable last reviewed
- June 7, 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