§ The result
Workable leads Emi on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Workable finishes 15 points clear of Emi under rubric v1.0 — 48 against 33 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Workable leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Emi is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Workable leads is Post-Market Monitoring, Emi 35 to Workable 42. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Emi 28, Workable 55, 20% weight), is only 35% of the weighted advantage Workable builds across the 6 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
Workable
Workable is an all-in-one applicant tracking system and HR platform whose AI feature layer (Workable AI / Workable Agent) sources, screens, scores, and matches candidates and drafts recruiting content within the recruiting workflow.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Workable under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Emi | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 35% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Workable 55
5.4 weighted points to Workable
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Workable 42
4.3 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Workable 62
2.2 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Workable 58
2.1 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Workable 42
0.8 weighted points to Workable
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Workable 56
0.6 weighted points to Workable
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -15.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -15 beside that -15.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 55 | -27 | -5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 42 | -24 | -4.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 58 | -14 | -2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 62 | -18 | -2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 56 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 48 (F) | -15 | -15.5 |
§ 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 | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 0 | 1 | — |
| 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 | 2 | 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 domainSources 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 | 6 | Sources 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; Workable has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Emi and Workable 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 Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workable 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