§ The result
Workday Recruiting AI leads Teamtailor by 9 points.
Workday Recruiting AI scores 56 and Teamtailor 47 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the ATS-integrated cohort. Workday Recruiting AI leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Teamtailor leads 3, including FRIA Support. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Teamtailor 30, Workday Recruiting AI 60 — and at an 18% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage Workday Recruiting AI holds across the 4 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
Workday Recruiting AI
AI features built into Workday Recruiting, including candidate-skill matching and recruiter productivity tools, surfaced inside the Workday ATS.
§ The record
Teamtailor and Workday Recruiting AI are both filed under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Teamtailor is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Teamtailor | Workday Recruiting AI |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | SE | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2005 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Teamtailor 30 · Workday Recruiting AI 60
5.4 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
20% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Teamtailor 50 · Workday Recruiting AI 70
4.0 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Teamtailor 54 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
1.3 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
15% weight · 88% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Teamtailor 42 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
1.1 weighted points to Teamtailor
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Teamtailor 42 · Workday Recruiting AI 35
0.8 weighted points to Teamtailor
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Teamtailor 58 · Workday Recruiting AI 55
0.4 weighted points to Teamtailor
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Teamtailor 62 · Workday Recruiting AI 65
0.2 weighted points to Workday Recruiting AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -8.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.3 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 -8.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Teamtailor minus Workday Recruiting AI.
| Category | Weight | Teamtailor | Workday Recruiting AI | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 70 | -20 | -4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 60 | -30 | -5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 65 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 35 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 65 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 47 (F) | 56 (F) | -9 | -8.6 |
§ 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 | Workday Recruiting AI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 14 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Teamtailor has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 14 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Workday Recruiting AI has 11 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 2 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Teamtailor, across 1 distinct source domain, and 11 for Workday Recruiting AI, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Teamtailor last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Workday Recruiting AI last reviewed
- May 21, 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