§ The result
HirePro leads Emi on 5 of the 7 criteria.
Inside the Screening cohort, rubric v1.0 puts HirePro on 38 and Emi on 33, 5 points apart. HirePro leads 5 of the 7 criteria and the remaining 2 are level, so Emi is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 5 HirePro leads is Article 11 Technical Documentation, Emi 28 to HirePro 30. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Emi 18, HirePro 33) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 48% of the weighted advantage HirePro holds across the 5 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
HirePro
HirePro's AI Recruiter matches resumes to a job, shortlists candidates and runs AI-led interviews that score each answer with written reasoning and a fraud and identity check, alongside proctored assessments, video interviews and campus-hiring workflows.
§ The record
Emi and HirePro are both filed under Screening 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 HirePro is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Emi | HirePro |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | IN |
| Founded | 2017 | 2004 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · HirePro 33
2.7 weighted points to HirePro
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · HirePro 55
1.3 weighted points to HirePro
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · HirePro 50
0.9 weighted points to HirePro
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · HirePro 30
0.4 weighted points to HirePro
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · HirePro 52
0.3 weighted points to HirePro
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -5.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.6 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 -5.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus HirePro.
| Category | Weight | Emi | HirePro | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 33 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 50 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 52 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 38 (F) | -5 | -5.6 |
§ 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 | HirePro | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 2 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 21 | 6 | 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; HirePro has 27 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 6 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 27 for HirePro, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HirePro last reviewed
- September 25, 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
Scored against