§ The result
Emi leads Mercor on all 7 criteria.
Both filed under Screening, Emi and Mercor come out 33 and 23 under rubric v1.0, 10 points in favour of Emi. Emi leads every one of the 7 criteria, Mercor none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Emi 44 to Mercor 42. The advantage Emi holds is spread out: Data Governance Disclosure is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Emi 44, Mercor 22, 15% weight), yet it supplies only 35% of the weighted points Emi gains 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
Mercor
Mercor is an AI talent platform that runs automated 20-minute AI video interviews and semantic resume/profile matching to vet, score, and place candidates and expert contractors, and offers an enterprise applicant-screening product that scores employers' applicant pools against role rubrics with pass/fail recommendations.
§ The record
Emi and Mercor are both filed under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Mercor is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Emi | Mercor |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2023 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Mercor 22
3.3 weighted points to Emi
12% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Mercor 20
1.8 weighted points to Emi
18% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Mercor 10
1.4 weighted points to Emi
20% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Mercor 22
1.2 weighted points to Emi
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Mercor 20
0.8 weighted points to Emi
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Mercor 40
0.6 weighted points to Emi
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Mercor 42
0.2 weighted points to Emi
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +9.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +10 beside that +9.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Mercor.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Mercor | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 22 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 10 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 20 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 22 | +22 | +3.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 42 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 40 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 23 (F) | +10 | +9.4 |
§ 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 | Mercor | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | — |
| 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 10 | 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; Mercor has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 10 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 Mercor, across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercor 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
Scored against