§ The result
Infor Talent Science leads Manatal by 8 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Infor Talent Science, filed under Assessment, finishes on 49 and Manatal, filed under ATS-integrated, on 41, 8 points apart. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Infor Talent Science: Infor Talent Science is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Manatal on Human Oversight Design. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Infor Talent Science 58, Manatal 33 — and at a 20% weight it carries 51% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Infor Talent Science
Infor Talent Science is a cloud-based pre-hire behavioral and cognitive assessment platform. It scores candidates against patented machine-learning 'Performance Profiles' built from the behavior and performance data of an employer's successful incumbents, and gives hiring teams fit scores, recommendations and interview questions that are used to rank and route applicants.
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
Infor Talent Science is filed under Assessment AI, Manatal 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, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Infor Talent Science | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Low |
| Headquarters | US | TH |
| Founded | 2002 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Infor Talent Science 58 · Manatal 33
5.0 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
18% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Infor Talent Science 42 · Manatal 22
3.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Infor Talent Science 50 · Manatal 60
1.2 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Infor Talent Science 57 · Manatal 52
0.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Infor Talent Science 35 · Manatal 33
0.3 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Infor Talent Science 45 · Manatal 43
0.2 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Infor Talent Science 60 · Manatal 62
0.2 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Infor Talent Science minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | Infor Talent Science | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 33 | +25 | +5.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 22 | +20 | +3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 43 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 62 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 41 (F) | +8 | +8.5 |
§ 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 | Infor Talent Science | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 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 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Infor Talent Science last reviewed
- September 25, 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