§ The result
Paylocity leads Emi on all 7 criteria.
Paylocity, filed under ATS-integrated, comes out 10 points above Emi, filed under Screening: 43 against 33 under rubric v1.0. Paylocity takes all 7 criteria from Emi without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is FRIA Support, Emi 25 to Paylocity 30. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Emi 28, Paylocity 44, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 30% of the weighted advantage Paylocity 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
Paylocity
Paylocity is a cloud-based HCM and payroll platform whose talent suite includes an applicant tracking system with generative-AI job-description and invite drafting, one-way video interviews, candidate self-scheduling, and a conversational "AI Assistant."
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Paylocity under ATS-integrated 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. Only Paylocity is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Emi | Paylocity |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 1997 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Paylocity 44
3.2 weighted points to Paylocity
18% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Paylocity 33
2.7 weighted points to Paylocity
15% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Paylocity 54
1.5 weighted points to Paylocity
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Paylocity 42
0.8 weighted points to Paylocity
8% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Paylocity 58
0.8 weighted points to Paylocity
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Paylocity 30
0.8 weighted points to Paylocity
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Paylocity 50
0.7 weighted points to Paylocity
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.5 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 -10.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Paylocity.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Paylocity | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 44 | -16 | -3.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 33 | -15 | -2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 54 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 50 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 58 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 43 (F) | -10 | -10.5 |
§ 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 | Paylocity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 11 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Paylocity has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 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 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 18 for Paylocity, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paylocity last reviewed
- July 17, 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