§ The result
Workstream leads Moonhub on all 7 criteria.
Workstream scores 39 and Moonhub 30 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Screening and Sourcing cohorts. Workstream is ahead of Moonhub on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Bias Audit Transparency at Moonhub 18 to Workstream 20. Customer Documentation is the widest raw gap (Moonhub 38, Workstream 56) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Moonhub 30, Workstream 40), 24% of the weighted advantage Workstream builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Moonhub
Moonhub is an AI recruiting platform whose agents (Qualify AI, Engage AI, Monitor AI) search, score, outreach to, and engage candidates across more than a billion public and proprietary profiles, working alongside human expert recruiters who vet candidates before presenting them.
Vendor profile
Workstream
Workstream is a mobile-first HR, payroll and hiring platform for hourly, multi-location employers such as QSR franchisees. Its hiring suite pairs a text-to-apply applicant tracking system with VoiceAI phone screens and VideoAI asynchronous video interviews, which return transcripts, AI summaries, pass/fail results for each question and match scores.
§ The record
Moonhub is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Workstream under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Workstream is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Moonhub | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2022 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 24% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Moonhub 30 · Workstream 40
2.0 weighted points to Workstream
12% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Moonhub 48 · Workstream 61
1.6 weighted points to Workstream
12% weight · 62% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Moonhub 22 · Workstream 35
1.6 weighted points to Workstream
8% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Moonhub 38 · Workstream 56
1.4 weighted points to Workstream
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Moonhub 40 · Workstream 47
1.1 weighted points to Workstream
18% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Moonhub 18 · Workstream 20
0.4 weighted points to Workstream
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Moonhub 25 · Workstream 27
0.3 weighted points to Workstream
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -8.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Moonhub minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | Moonhub | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -2.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 20 | -2 | -0.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 27 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 40 | 47 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 61 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 22 | 35 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 38 | 56 | -18 | -1.4 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 39 (F) | -9 | -8.3 |
§ 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 | Moonhub | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Moonhub has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workstream sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Moonhub, across 3 distinct source domains, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Moonhub last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workstream 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