HR AI Index
Index › Talent acquisition › Applicant tracking syste › Ashby vs Workable
Applicant tracking systems · September 2026 Edition

Ashby vs Workable

One of twelve models named Ashby first on the direct prompt; one named Workable. Ashby was named by ten of the twelve models and Workable by twelve and Ashby carries 26 labels and Workable 36, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Ashby

accepted challenger

Named in seven categories this edition.

Workable

accepted challenger

Named in nine categories this edition.

First-choice share7%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels2636A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Ashby reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Greenhouse was named alongside these two in eleven of the twelve direct answers. Greenhouse vs Ashby · Greenhouse vs Workable · Breezy HR vs Ashby

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 applicant tracking systems page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
AshbyFirst choices, of twelve modelsWorkable
Direct11
Paraphrase21
Comparative10
Budget-constrained00
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.

Across every category in the September 2026 Edition, Ashby and Workable were named in the same answer sixty-one times, of the 136 answers naming Ashby and the 288 naming Workable. In those answers Workable took the first choice ten times and Ashby three.

Every model, every framing

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

The direct prompt

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

Ashby first, Workable not the choice

1 of 12 modelsWorkable was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Gemini 3.5 FlashAshby alternatives: BambooHR, Greenhouse, Lever, Rippling

Workable first, Ashby an alternative

1 of 12 modelsAshby was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
DeepSeek V4 FlashGreenhouse, Workable alternatives: Ashby

Neither was the first choice, one was named

9 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
GPT-5.4 miniGreenhouse alternatives: Lever, SmartRecruiters, Workable
Perplexity SonarGreenhouse alternatives: Ashby, Pinpoint, Workable
Grok 4.1 FastGreenhouse alternatives: Lever, Workable
Mistral SmallGreenhouse, Pinpoint alternatives: Lever, Workable
Llama 4 MaverickPinpoint alternatives: Greenhouse, JazzHR, Lever, Workable
Qwen 3.7 FlashGreenhouse alternatives: Lever, Pinpoint, Workable
Kimi K2Greenhouse alternatives: Ashby, Pinpoint, Workable
GLM 4.7 FlashXGreenhouse alternatives: Ashby, BambooHR, Lever, Workable
MiniMax M2.5Greenhouse, Lever alternatives: Pinpoint, Workable, Zoho Recruit

Neither was named

1 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice

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 twenty points.
Workable20%#2 of 11
Ashby0%#10 of 11
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: Ashby leads at mid-market.
Ashby7%#5 of 13
Workable4%#6 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Workable leads at enterprise.
Workable7%#– of 8
Ashby2%#– of 8
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Ashby

No label in this category carried a quote.

What the models said about Workable

No label in this category carried a quote.

Also compared
Greenhouse vs AshbyGreenhouse vs WorkableBreezy HR vs AshbyBreezy HR vs WorkableZoho Recruit vs AshbyZoho Recruit vs WorkableLever vs AshbyLever vs WorkableAshby vs PinpointAshby vs ManatalWorkable vs PinpointWorkable vs ManatalAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full applicant tracking syste standing

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.