AI Indexes
HR AI Index
Index › Talent acquisition › AI recruiting assistants › Manatal vs Humanly
AI recruiting assistants · October 2026 Edition

Manatal vs Humanly

Zero of fourteen models named Manatal first on the direct prompt; zero named Humanly. Manatal was named by twelve of the fourteen models and Humanly by eight and Manatal carries 24 labels and Humanly 10, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Manatal

endorsed leader

Named in nine categories this edition.

Humanly

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

First-choice share31%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%10%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#6A position in a field of 15; printed, not drawn.
Labels2410A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Manatal reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Greenhouse was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Manatal vs Workable · Manatal vs Greenhouse · Manatal vs Zoho Recruit

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the AI recruiting assistants page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
ManatalFirst choices, of fourteen modelsHumanly
Direct00
Paraphrase22
Comparative00
Budget-constrained1201 against Humanly
Scale-constrained10
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Manatal and Humanly stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Manatal Humanly first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Manatal on the left and Humanly on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Manatal and Humanly stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

4 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5GoPerfect alternatives: Ashby, Greenhouse, Manatal, Pin, hireEZ
Grok 4.1 FastWorkable alternatives: Greenhouse, Lever, Manatal, Pin
GLM 4.7 FlashXGreenhouse alternatives: Alex, Ashby, BrightHire, Gem, Humanly, Lever, Manatal
MiniMax M2.5Workable alternatives: Greenhouse, Humanly, Lever, SeekOut

Neither was named

10 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniGem alternatives: 100Hires, Greenhouse
Gemini 3.5 FlashGem alternatives: Juicebox, Metaview, Moonhub, hireEZ
Perplexity SonarWorkable alternatives: LinkedIn Hiring Assistant, Paradox, SeekOut
Mistral SmallWorkable alternatives: Greenhouse, SeekOut, hireEZ
DeepSeek V4 FlashGem alternatives: Workable, hireEZ
Llama 4 MaverickGreenhouse alternatives: SeekOut, Workable, hireEZ
Qwen 3.7 FlashWorkable alternatives: Greenhouse, SeekOut, hireEZ
Kimi K2Greenhouse, Workable alternatives: Lever, Paradox
GPT-6 LunaAshby alternatives: Gem, hireEZ
Muse Glimmer 30BGreenhouse, Workable alternatives: Ashby, Gem, GoPerfect, hireEZ

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Manatal leads by twenty-nine points.
Manatal29%#1 of 9
Humanly0%#– of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Manatal leads by twenty-seven points.
Manatal31%#1 of 15
Humanly4%#6 of 15
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Manatal0%#– of 13
Humanly0%#– of 13
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Manatal

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.

“Manatal – repeatedly called out as the budget AI recruiter.... "Best For: AI-powered recruiting on a budget"the budget AI recruiter” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“Aim for tools like Manatal (affordable AI built-in), Juicebox (sourcing), or monday agents (end-to-end) suited for mid-sized teams.” Grok 4.1 Fast · scale prompt · first choice

What the models said about Humanly

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.

“G2 notes its pricing is better suited to mid-market/enterprise and may be too much for low-volume teams” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · soft negative
“Best for General & GTM Roles (Sales, Marketing, CS): Humanly ... is an excellent choice.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Humanly is the most quoted fit for mid-size teams right now.” Muse Glimmer 30B · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“A conversational screening platform tailored for mid-market and early-career recruitment.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · alternative
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.