§ The result
1 point separates ZipRecruiter and Workstream.
ZipRecruiter (Sourcing) edges Workstream (Screening) by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 40 to 39. ZipRecruiter leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Workstream leads 2, including Human Oversight Design, and 2 are level. Human Oversight Design is the widest raw gap (Workstream 61, ZipRecruiter 55) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Data Governance Disclosure at 15% (Workstream 47, ZipRecruiter 52), 36% of the weighted advantage ZipRecruiter builds across the 3 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
ZipRecruiter
ZipRecruiter is an online employment marketplace whose AI matching engine sends employers' job postings out, alerts matched job seekers and invites them to apply, and labels and ranks applicants (for example as 'Great Match') in the employer's candidate dashboard.
§ The record
Workstream is filed under Screening AI, ZipRecruiter under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Workstream is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Workstream | ZipRecruiter |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Workstream 47 · ZipRecruiter 52
0.8 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
18% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Workstream 20 · ZipRecruiter 24
0.7 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Workstream 61 · ZipRecruiter 55
0.7 weighted points to Workstream
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Workstream 35 · ZipRecruiter 40
0.6 weighted points to ZipRecruiter
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Workstream 56 · ZipRecruiter 54
0.2 weighted points to Workstream
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -1.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 3.0 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 -1.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Workstream minus ZipRecruiter.
| Category | Weight | Workstream | ZipRecruiter | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 24 | -4 | -0.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 27 | 27 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 47 | 52 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 61 | 55 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 56 | 54 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 39 (F) | 40 (F) | -1 | -1.2 |
§ 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 | Workstream | ZipRecruiter | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 28 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 28 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Workstream has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; ZipRecruiter has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 28 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Workstream and ZipRecruiter sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Workstream, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for ZipRecruiter, across 6 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Workstream last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- ZipRecruiter 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