§ The result
Sapia.ai leads Workable on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Sapia.ai scores 56 and Workable 48 under rubric v1.0, an 8-point gap across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Sapia.ai leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Workable is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Sapia.ai leads is Data Governance Disclosure, Sapia.ai 62 to Workable 58. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Sapia.ai 70, Workable 55, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 36% of the weighted advantage Sapia.ai holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Sapia.ai
Structured, text-based chat interview that scores candidates on personality (HEXACO) and competency traits - with no video, audio, or demographic data used.
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
Sapia.ai is filed under Assessment AI, Workable under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Sapia.ai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Sapia.ai | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | AU | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 36% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sapia.ai 70 · Workable 55
3.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sapia.ai 52 · Workable 42
1.8 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 76% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sapia.ai 35 · Workable 25
1.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
12% weight · 87% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sapia.ai 50 · Workable 42
1.0 weighted points to Sapia.ai
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sapia.ai 62 · Workable 58
0.6 weighted points to Sapia.ai
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sapia.ai 62 · Workable 56
0.5 weighted points to Sapia.ai
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 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 +8 beside that +8.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sapia.ai minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Sapia.ai | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 55 | +15 | +3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 52 | 42 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 25 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 42 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 56 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 48 (F) | +8 | +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 | Sapia.ai | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 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% | 3 | 0 | 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% | 16 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Sapia.ai has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 4 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 Sapia.ai 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 Sapia.ai, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sapia.ai last reviewed
- June 7, 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