§ The result
SHL takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
SHL sits 10 points above Manatal under rubric v1.0 — 51 against 41 — with SHL filed under Assessment and Manatal under ATS-integrated. Manatal leads more of the criteria than SHL — 4 to 3 — but Article 11 Technical Documentation, which SHL leads, carries 20% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to SHL. SHL takes the heaviest weighted swing, Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Manatal 33, SHL 60), which is 48% of the weighted advantage SHL holds; the widest raw gap is a different criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, Manatal 22 to SHL 50.
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
SHL
SHL is a global talent-assessment provider offering AI-scored cognitive ability, personality, behavioral, situational-judgement, coding, and video-interview assessments that score, rank, and recommend candidates for hiring and development decisions.
§ The record
Manatal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, SHL under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and 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 | SHL |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | TH | GB |
| Founded | 2019 | 1977 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Manatal 33 · SHL 60
5.4 weighted points to SHL
18% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Manatal 22 · SHL 50
5.0 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Manatal 52 · SHL 58
0.9 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Manatal 33 · SHL 30
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Manatal 43 · SHL 40
0.4 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Manatal 60 · SHL 58
0.2 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Manatal 62 · SHL 60
0.2 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -10.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Manatal minus SHL.
| Category | Weight | Manatal | SHL | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 60 | -27 | -5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 50 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 30 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 43 | 40 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 51 (F) | -10 | -10.1 |
§ 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 | Manatal | SHL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Manatal has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Manatal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- SHL 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