§ The result
Greenhouse leads Workable on all 7 criteria.
Greenhouse finishes 19 points clear of Workable inside the ATS-integrated cohort under rubric v1.0: 67 (D) against 48 (F). Greenhouse leads every one of the 7 criteria, Workable none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Greenhouse 66 to Workable 62. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Greenhouse 86, Workable 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Greenhouse holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Greenhouse
End-to-end applicant tracking system and structured-hiring platform, now layered with 'Greenhouse AI' features such as resume parsing, Talent Matching, and interview summarisation.
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
Greenhouse and Workable are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Sourcing and Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Greenhouse | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Greenhouse 86 · Workable 42
7.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
20% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Greenhouse 78 · Workable 55
4.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 79% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Greenhouse 42 · Workable 25
2.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Greenhouse 58 · Workable 42
1.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Greenhouse 64 · Workable 58
0.9 weighted points to Greenhouse
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Greenhouse 64 · Workable 56
0.6 weighted points to Greenhouse
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Greenhouse 66 · Workable 62
0.5 weighted points to Greenhouse
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +19.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +19 beside that +19.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Greenhouse minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Greenhouse | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 78 | 55 | +23 | +4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 86 | 42 | +44 | +7.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 64 | 58 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 62 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 42 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 67 (D) | 48 (F) | +19 | +19.0 |
§ 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 | Greenhouse | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Greenhouse has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 1 documented absence; Workable has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Greenhouse and Workable sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Greenhouse, across 3 distinct source domains, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Greenhouse last reviewed
- June 7, 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