§ The result
SHL leads Workstream by 12 points.
SHL, filed under Assessment, comes out 12 points above Workstream, filed under Screening: 51 against 39 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of SHL: SHL is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Workstream on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — SHL 50, Workstream 20 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage SHL holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
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
SHL is filed under Assessment AI, Workstream under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | SHL | Workstream |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 1977 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 42% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
SHL 50 · Workstream 20
5.4 weighted points to SHL
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
SHL 60 · Workstream 40
4.0 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
SHL 58 · Workstream 47
1.6 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
SHL 40 · Workstream 35
0.6 weighted points to SHL
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
SHL 30 · Workstream 27
0.4 weighted points to SHL
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
SHL 58 · Workstream 61
0.4 weighted points to Workstream
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
SHL 60 · Workstream 56
0.3 weighted points to SHL
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +12 beside that +12.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is SHL minus Workstream.
| Category | Weight | SHL | Workstream | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 40 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 50 | 20 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 27 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 47 | +11 | +1.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 61 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 35 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 56 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 51 (F) | 39 (F) | +12 | +12.1 |
§ 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 | SHL | Workstream | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
SHL has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for SHL, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- SHL 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