§ The result
isolved leads Manatal by 6 points.
isolved finishes 6 points ahead of Manatal under rubric v1.0, 47 to 41, both scored as ATS-integrated entries. Manatal takes 3 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 4 for isolved, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — isolved 45, Manatal 22 — and at an 18% weight it carries 51% of the weighted advantage isolved holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
isolved
isolved is a US HCM and payroll provider whose isolved Talent Acquisition applicant tracking system (formerly ApplicantPro) uses AI Candidate Matching to score each applicant's resume against the job description and sort the applicant list, alongside AI job-ad writing and WedgeHR-powered one-way video interviews.
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
isolved and Manatal are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
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 | isolved | Manatal |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | TH |
| Founded | 1986 | 2019 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
isolved 45 · Manatal 22
4.1 weighted points to isolved
20% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
isolved 50 · Manatal 33
3.4 weighted points to isolved
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
isolved 55 · Manatal 60
0.6 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
isolved 47 · Manatal 43
0.5 weighted points to isolved
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
isolved 56 · Manatal 62
0.5 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
isolved 30 · Manatal 33
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
isolved 53 · Manatal 52
0.1 weighted points to isolved
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is isolved minus Manatal.
| Category | Weight | isolved | Manatal | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 33 | +17 | +3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 45 | 22 | +23 | +4.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 53 | 52 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 60 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 43 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 62 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 41 (F) | +6 | +6.6 |
§ 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 | isolved | Manatal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 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 domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
isolved has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for isolved sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 56 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for isolved, across 4 distinct source domains, and 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- isolved 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