§ The result
Fountain takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
Fountain (Screening) edges Manatal (ATS-integrated) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 44 to 41. Manatal leads more of the criteria than Fountain — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which Fountain leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Fountain. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Fountain 50, Manatal 33 — and at a 20% weight it carries 64% of the weighted advantage Fountain holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Fountain
AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
Vendor profile
Manatal
Cloud-based applicant tracking system and recruitment CRM for agencies and HR teams, featuring an AI engine that scores and ranks candidates against job requirements and an asynchronous AI video Interviewer.
§ The record
Fountain is filed under Screening AI, Manatal 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. Only Manatal is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Fountain | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | TH |
| Founded | 2014 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Fountain 50 · Manatal 33
3.4 weighted points to Fountain
18% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Fountain 30 · Manatal 22
1.4 weighted points to Fountain
8% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Fountain 52 · Manatal 62
0.8 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Fountain 30 · Manatal 33
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Fountain 55 · Manatal 52
0.4 weighted points to Fountain
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Fountain 40 · Manatal 43
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Fountain 58 · Manatal 60
0.2 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.1 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 +3.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Fountain minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | Fountain | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 33 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 22 | +8 | +1.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 43 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 52 | 62 | -10 | -0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 44 (F) | 41 (F) | +3 | +3.4 |
§ 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 | Fountain | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Fountain has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 40 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Fountain, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Fountain last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Manatal 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