§ The result
4 points separate Workable and Equalture.
Workable (ATS-integrated) edges Equalture (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 48 to 44. Workable leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Equalture leads 2, including FRIA Support. Workable takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Equalture 45, Workable 55), which is 42% of the weighted advantage Workable holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Human Oversight Design, Equalture 50 to Workable 62.
Vendor profile
Equalture
Equalture is a game-based pre-employment assessment platform whose short browser games measure candidates' cognitive abilities and behavioural tendencies and convert them into a Fit Score ranked against an employer-specific "Success Profile" derived from that employer's own top performers.
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
Equalture is filed under Assessment AI, Workable under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Equalture is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Equalture | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | NL | US |
| Founded | 2018 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 34% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Equalture 45 · Workable 55
2.0 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Equalture 50 · Workable 62
1.4 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 72% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Equalture 30 · Workable 25
0.8 weighted points to Equalture
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Equalture 38 · Workable 42
0.5 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Equalture 55 · Workable 58
0.4 weighted points to Workable
18% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Equalture 40 · Workable 42
0.4 weighted points to Workable
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Equalture 60 · Workable 56
0.3 weighted points to Equalture
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Equalture minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Equalture | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 55 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 42 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 48 (F) | -4 | -3.7 |
§ 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 | Equalture | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Equalture 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 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 Equalture, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Equalture last reviewed
- August 2, 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