§ The result
Workable leads Personio by 8 points.
Workable scores 48 and Personio 40 under rubric v1.0 — an 8-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Workable leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Personio leads 2, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Personio 25, Workable 42, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 34% of the weighted advantage Workable holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Personio
Personio is a European cloud HR platform for small and mid-sized companies that combines an HRIS with recruiting/ATS, time tracking, payroll and an AI assistant, and is adding agentic AI candidate sourcing and application screening through its 2026 acquisition of aurio.
Vendor profile
Workable
Workable is an all-in-one applicant tracking system and HR platform whose AI feature layer (Workable AI / Workable Agent) sources, screens, scores, and matches candidates and drafts recruiting content within the recruiting workflow.
§ The record
Personio and Workable are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Personio | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Personio 25 · Workable 42
3.1 weighted points to Workable
20% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Personio 40 · Workable 55
3.0 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Personio 48 · Workable 62
1.7 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Personio 52 · Workable 58
0.9 weighted points to Workable
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Personio 30 · Workable 25
0.8 weighted points to Personio
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Personio 48 · Workable 42
0.7 weighted points to Personio
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Personio 50 · Workable 56
0.5 weighted points to Workable
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -7.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -8 beside that -7.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Personio minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Personio | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 58 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 48 | 42 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 50 | 56 | -6 | -0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 48 (F) | -8 | -7.7 |
§ 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 | Personio | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Personio has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Workable has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Personio and Workable sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Personio, across 5 distinct source domains, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Personio last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workable 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