§ The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads Emi on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Workday Recruiting AI finishes 23 points clear of Emi under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 33 — across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Workday Recruiting AI 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 Workday Recruiting AI leads is FRIA Support, Emi 25 to Workday Recruiting AI 35. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Emi 28, Workday Recruiting AI 70, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 37% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI holds across the 6 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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
§ The record
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Workday Recruiting AI under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Emi is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Emi | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | AR | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Workday Recruiting AI 70
8.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Workday Recruiting AI 60
7.6 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
2.5 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Workday Recruiting AI 55
1.6 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.5 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
1.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -23.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 23.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -23 beside that -23.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Workday Recruiting AI.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 70 | -42 | -8.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 60 | -42 | -7.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 35 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 55 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 65 | -21 | -2.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 65 | -17 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 56 (F) | -23 | -23.0 |
§ 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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 2 | 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; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 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 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI last reviewed
- May 21, 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