Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Emi vs Entelo
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.
Substantial gaps
Screening
Entelo
Entelo is an AI-powered talent sourcing and diversity-recruiting platform that aggregates hundreds of millions of public candidate profiles and applies predictive machine-learning models to score, rank, and surface (including underrepresented) candidates for recruiters.
Substantial gaps
Sourcing
The result
Emi and Entelo tie at 33.
Emi (Screening) and Entelo (Sourcing) tie at 33 under rubric v1.0, arriving there from different criteria. Emi leads 2 of the 7 criteria and Entelo 3, with 2 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. One criterion, Customer Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Emi 48, Entelo 40) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 8% weight it makes up 73% of the weighted advantage Emi holds across the 2 criteria it leads.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Emi2
- Entelo3
- Level2
- Widest raw gap
- Customer Documentation48 vs 40
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Customer Documentation8% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Entelo under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Emi | Entelo |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2011 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Customer Documentation
8% weight36% of the movement so far
Emi48Entelo400.6 weighted points to Emi
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight58% of the movement so far
Emi28Entelo300.4 weighted points to Entelo
- 3
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight78% of the movement so far
Emi18Entelo200.4 weighted points to Entelo
- 4
Human Oversight Design
12% weight92% of the movement so far
Emi44Entelo420.2 weighted points to Emi
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight100% of the movement so far
Emi44Entelo450.1 weighted points to Entelo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to 0.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 1.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that 0.0.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Entelo, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Entelo | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 20 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 45 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 42 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 40 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 33F | 33F | - | 0.0 |
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 | Emi | Entelo | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 2 | 2 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Entelo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 8 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 42 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 16 for Entelo, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Entelo 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.