§ The result
Manatal leads micro1 by 5 points.
Manatal scores 41 and micro1 36 under rubric v1.0, a 5-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Screening cohorts. Manatal leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while micro1 leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation. micro1 takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Manatal 33, micro1 50), 100% of the weighted advantage it builds, while the widest raw gap is on Post-Market Monitoring, Manatal 43 to micro1 25.
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.
Vendor profile
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
Manatal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, micro1 under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Manatal | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | TH | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 30% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Manatal 33 · micro1 50
3.4 weighted points to micro1
12% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Manatal 43 · micro1 25
2.2 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Manatal 33 · micro1 22
1.6 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Manatal 60 · micro1 48
1.4 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Manatal 62 · micro1 45
1.4 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Manatal 52 · micro1 45
1.1 weighted points to Manatal
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Manatal 22 · micro1 20
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Manatal minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | Manatal | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 50 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 20 | +2 | +0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 22 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 45 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 48 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 43 | 25 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 36 (F) | +5 | +4.6 |
§ 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 | Manatal | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for micro1 sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 33 for micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Manatal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 last reviewed
- September 25, 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