§ The result
Equalture leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Equalture, filed under Assessment, comes out 11 points above Emi, filed under Screening: 44 against 33 under rubric v1.0. Equalture takes all 7 criteria and Emi none of them; the nearest contest is Post-Market Monitoring, Emi 35 to Equalture 38. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Emi 18, Equalture 40, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Equalture holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Equalture
Equalture is a game-based pre-employment assessment platform whose short browser games measure candidates' cognitive abilities and behavioural tendencies and convert them into a Fit Score ranked against an employer-specific "Success Profile" derived from that employer's own top performers.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Equalture under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Equalture is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Emi | Equalture |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | High |
| Headquarters | AR | NL |
| Founded | 2017 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Equalture 40
4.0 weighted points to Equalture
20% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Equalture 45
3.4 weighted points to Equalture
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Equalture 55
1.6 weighted points to Equalture
8% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Equalture 60
1.0 weighted points to Equalture
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Equalture 30
0.8 weighted points to Equalture
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Equalture 50
0.7 weighted points to Equalture
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Equalture 38
0.4 weighted points to Equalture
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Equalture.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Equalture | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 45 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 40 | -22 | -4.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 50 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 44 (F) | -11 | -11.8 |
§ 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 | Emi | Equalture | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 19 | 7 | 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; Equalture 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 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 26 for Equalture, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Equalture last reviewed
- August 2, 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