§ The result
Sapia.ai leads Keka on all 7 criteria.
Sapia.ai finishes 19 points clear of Keka under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 37 — across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Sapia.ai takes all 7 criteria and Keka none of them; the nearest contest is FRIA Support, Keka 30 to Sapia.ai 35. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Keka 30, Sapia.ai 70) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Keka
Keka is an HR and payroll suite whose Keka Hire ATS scores each applicant against recruiter-defined role requirements and runs an AI screening conversation that decides which candidates reach the shortlist.
Vendor profile
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
§ The record
Keka is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Sapia.ai under Assessment 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 Sapia.ai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Keka | Sapia.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | IN | AU |
| Founded | 2014 | 2013 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Keka 30 · Sapia.ai 70
8.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
18% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Keka 20 · Sapia.ai 52
5.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Keka 50 · Sapia.ai 62
1.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Keka 50 · Sapia.ai 62
1.4 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Keka 40 · Sapia.ai 50
1.2 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Keka 30 · Sapia.ai 35
0.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Keka 55 · Sapia.ai 62
0.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -19.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 19.5 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 -19.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Keka minus Sapia.ai.
| Category | Weight | Keka | Sapia.ai | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 70 | -40 | -8.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 52 | -32 | -5.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 62 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 50 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 62 | -7 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 37 (F) | 56 (F) | -19 | -19.5 |
§ 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 | Keka | Sapia.ai | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 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 domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Keka has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sapia.ai sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Keka, across 1 distinct source domain, and 20 for Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Keka last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sapia.ai 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