HomeCompareGlider AI vs Workable

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Glider AI vs Workable

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Glider AI takes the total, Workable takes more of the criteria.

Glider AI (Assessment) edges Workable (ATS-integrated) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 52 to 48. Workable leads more of the criteria than Glider AI — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Glider AI leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Glider AI. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Glider AI 68, Workable 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 72% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 3 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Glider AI 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 Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordGlider AIWorkable
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20202012

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 53% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Glider AI 68 · Workable 42

    4.7 weighted points to Glider AI

  2. 15% weight · 70% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Glider AI 35 · Workable 25

    1.5 weighted points to Glider AI

  3. 12% weight · 80% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Glider AI 55 · Workable 62

    0.8 weighted points to Workable

  4. 20% weight · 87% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Glider AI 52 · Workable 55

    0.6 weighted points to Workable

  5. 15% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Glider AI 54 · Workable 58

    0.6 weighted points to Workable

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Glider AI 60 · Workable 56

    0.3 weighted points to Glider AI

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Glider AI 40 · Workable 42

    0.2 weighted points to Workable

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.8 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 +4.2.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Glider AI minus Workable.

CategoryWeightGlider AIWorkableΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5255-3-0.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%6842+26+4.7
FRIA Support15%3525+10+1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%5458-4-0.6
Human Oversight Design12%5562-7-0.8
Post-Market Monitoring12%4042-2-0.2
Customer Documentation8%6056+4+0.3
Total100%52 (F)48 (F)+4+4.2

§ 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.

CriterionWeightGlider AIWorkable
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31Audit reportSources on a separate domain11—
FRIA Support15%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain01—
Data Governance Disclosure15%61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%276Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain126Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 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 Glider AI and Workable sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Glider AI 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.