HR AI Index
Index Talent acquisition AI recruiting assistants › Workable vs SeekOut
AI recruiting assistants · September 2026 Edition

Workable vs SeekOut

One of twelve models named Workable first on the direct prompt; one named SeekOut. Workable was named by eleven of the twelve models and SeekOut by ten and Workable carries 24 labels and SeekOut 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Workable

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

SeekOut

accepted challenger

Named in six categories this edition.

First-choice share17%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate8%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#6A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels2413A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Workable reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Ashby was named alongside these two in seven of the twelve direct answers. GoPerfect vs Workable · GoPerfect vs SeekOut · Workable vs Manatal

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve 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 twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
WorkableFirst choices, of twelve modelsSeekOut
Direct11
Paraphrase60
Comparative10
Budget-constrained002 against Workable
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Workable and SeekOut 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
Workable SeekOut first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Workable on the left and SeekOut on the right.

The direct prompt

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

Workable first, SeekOut not the choice

1 of 12 modelsSeekOut was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Grok 4.1 FastWorkable alternatives: Ashby, hireEZ

SeekOut first, Workable not the choice

1 of 12 modelsWorkable was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
GPT-5.4 miniSeekOut alternatives: Paradox

Neither was the first choice, one was named

6 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5GoPerfect alternatives: Juicebox, Workable
Perplexity SonarGoPerfect alternatives: Autonomy Recruit, Workable
DeepSeek V4 FlashGreenhouse alternatives: Ashby, Gem, SmartRecruiters, Workable, hireEZ
Kimi K2Greenhouse alternatives: GoPerfect, Lever, Workable
GLM 4.7 FlashXTheHireHub.AI alternatives: Ashby, Autonomy Recruit, Greenhouse, Workable
MiniMax M2.5TheHireHub.AI alternatives: Ashby, Lever, Workable

Neither was named

4 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Gemini 3.5 FlashAshby alternatives: Findem, Humanly, Juicebox
Mistral SmallAshby alternatives: Greenhouse, TheHireHub.AI, hireEZ
Llama 4 MaverickAutonomy Recruit alternatives: Humanly, Lever, TheHireHub.AI
Qwen 3.7 FlashGem alternatives: Ashby, Autonomy Recruit, Greenhouse, TheHireHub.AI

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
Workable leads by twelve points.
Workable12%#3 of 9
SeekOut0%#– of 9
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Workable leads by fourteen points.
Workable17%#2 of 13
SeekOut2%#6 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Workable leads by eight points.
Workable10%#3 of 10
SeekOut2%#7 of 10
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Workable

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

“The Best All-in-One Solution: Workable ... Go with Workable. It offers the best balance of price, ease of use, and AI capability” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend starting with either Pin (for simplicity and cost-effectiveness) or Workable (for comprehensive features)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice

What the models said about SeekOut

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

“the best choice is usually SeekOut if your main need is finding, sourcing, screening, and engaging professional/knowledge-worker candidates” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
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.