§ The result
Wonderlic takes the total, Manatal takes more of the criteria.
Wonderlic (Assessment) edges Manatal (ATS-integrated) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 43 to 41. Manatal leads more of the criteria than Wonderlic — 5 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Wonderlic leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Wonderlic. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Manatal 22, Wonderlic 48 — and at an 18% weight it carries 55% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
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
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
§ The record
Manatal is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Manatal | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | TH | US |
| Founded | 2019 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Manatal 22 · Wonderlic 48
4.7 weighted points to Wonderlic
20% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Manatal 33 · Wonderlic 52
3.8 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Manatal 52 · Wonderlic 38
2.1 weighted points to Manatal
15% weight · 81% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Manatal 33 · Wonderlic 25
1.2 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Manatal 43 · Wonderlic 33
1.2 weighted points to Manatal
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Manatal 60 · Wonderlic 52
1.0 weighted points to Manatal
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Manatal 62 · Wonderlic 55
0.6 weighted points to Manatal
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Manatal minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Manatal | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 33 | 52 | -19 | -3.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 48 | -26 | -4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 25 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 38 | +14 | +2.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 52 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 43 | 33 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 41 (F) | 43 (F) | -2 | -2.5 |
§ 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 | Manatal | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 6 | 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; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Manatal, across 1 distinct source domain, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Manatal last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic 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