§ The result
Findem leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Rubric v1.0 puts 25 points between Findem (Sourcing) and Emi (Screening): 58 for Findem, 33 for Emi. Of the 7 criteria Emi wins none, and the narrowest lead Findem holds is on Post-Market Monitoring, Emi 35 to Findem 42. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Emi 18, Findem 83) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 47% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
Findem
AI talent-intelligence platform that uses 'attribute'/3D-data enrichment over 850M+ candidate profiles to power candidate search, sourcing, talent CRM, and agentic recruiting workflows.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Findem under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Scheduling.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Emi | Findem |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 47% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Findem 83
11.7 weighted points to Findem
20% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Findem 58
6.0 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 78% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Findem 38
1.9 weighted points to Findem
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Findem 57
1.9 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Findem 60
1.9 weighted points to Findem
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Findem 42
0.8 weighted points to Findem
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Findem 58
0.8 weighted points to Findem
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -25.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 25.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -25 beside that -25.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Findem.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Findem | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 58 | -30 | -6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 83 | -65 | -11.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 38 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 57 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 60 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 58 (F) | -25 | -25.2 |
§ 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 | Findem | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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 | 12 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Emi and Findem sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Findem 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