§ The result
Workable leads Intervue.io on all 7 criteria.
Workable finishes 17 points clear of Intervue.io under rubric v1.0 — 48 against 31 — across the ATS-integrated and Video interview cohorts. Workable leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; Intervue.io leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap (Intervue.io 12, Workable 42) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Intervue.io 28, Workable 55), 32% of the weighted advantage Workable builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Intervue.io
Intervue.io runs outsourced, recorded technical interviews through a network of vetted engineer-interviewers and also sells AI screening: an agent that phones or interviews candidates by voice or avatar and returns scored summaries, AI scoring of resumes and recorded video answers, and a built-in ATS.
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
Intervue.io is filed under Video interview AI, Workable under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Intervue.io is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Intervue.io | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | IN | US |
| Founded | 2020 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Intervue.io 28 · Workable 55
5.4 weighted points to Workable
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Intervue.io 12 · Workable 42
5.4 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Intervue.io 38 · Workable 58
3.0 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Intervue.io 30 · Workable 42
1.4 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Intervue.io 54 · Workable 62
1.0 weighted points to Workable
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Intervue.io 50 · Workable 56
0.5 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Intervue.io 22 · Workable 25
0.4 weighted points to Workable
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -17 beside that -17.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Intervue.io minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Intervue.io | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 55 | -27 | -5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 12 | 42 | -30 | -5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 22 | 25 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 62 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 56 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 31 (F) | 48 (F) | -17 | -17.1 |
§ 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 | Intervue.io | 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% | 5 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Intervue.io has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 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 Intervue.io and Workable sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Intervue.io, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Intervue.io 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.
§ Where next