§ The result
1 point separates Workable and Teamtailor.
Within the ATS-integrated cohort, Workable edges Teamtailor by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 48 to 47. Workable leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Teamtailor leads 2, including FRIA Support, and 2 are level. FRIA Support is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Teamtailor — Teamtailor 42, Workable 25, on a 15% weight — which is 84% of the weighted advantage Teamtailor holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Teamtailor
Teamtailor is a Stockholm-based applicant tracking and employer-branding platform whose OpenAI-powered "Co-pilot" assists recruiters with candidate screening, resume and interview summaries, talent-pool matching, interview-question generation, and AI-assisted job-ad and content writing.
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
Teamtailor 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 | Teamtailor | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 36% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Teamtailor 42 · Workable 25
2.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
18% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Teamtailor 30 · Workable 42
2.2 weighted points to Workable
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Teamtailor 50 · Workable 55
1.0 weighted points to Workable
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Teamtailor 54 · Workable 62
1.0 weighted points to Workable
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Teamtailor 62 · Workable 56
0.5 weighted points to Teamtailor
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -1.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Teamtailor minus Workable.
| Category | Weight | Teamtailor | Workable | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 25 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 62 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 56 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 48 (F) | -1 | -1.1 |
§ 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 | Teamtailor | Workable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 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 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 Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Workable, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 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