§ The result
3 points separate Emi and Moonhub.
Emi holds a 3-point edge over Moonhub under rubric v1.0, 33 to 30, across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. The 7 criteria split 3 to 2 in favour of Emi, with 2 level: Emi is ahead on Post-Market Monitoring and Moonhub on Human Oversight Design. Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Emi 35, Moonhub 22 — and at a 12% weight it carries 53% of the weighted advantage Emi holds across the 3 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
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Moonhub under Candidate sourcing 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.
| Record | Emi | Moonhub |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Moonhub 22
1.6 weighted points to Emi
8% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Moonhub 38
0.8 weighted points to Emi
15% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Moonhub 40
0.6 weighted points to Emi
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Moonhub 48
0.5 weighted points to Moonhub
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Moonhub 30
0.4 weighted points to Moonhub
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +2.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +3 beside that +2.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Moonhub.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Moonhub | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 30 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 18 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 40 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 48 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 38 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 30 (F) | +3 | +2.1 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 1 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 6 | 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; Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 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 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Moonhub 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