Enterprise talent acquisition teams managing multi-department requisitions, offer approvals, and talent CRMs.
Disclosure: The HR Stack Guide is an independent comparison guide. We may earn a commission if you sign up through our links at no extra cost to you. Read full disclosure.
Primary Terms & Pricing Audited Q3 2026 | Unbiased Data
⭐️ 4.7/5 (400+ reviews)
Based on G2 & Industry Benchmark user reviews
⭐️ 4.4/5 (800+ reviews)
Based on G2 & Industry Benchmark user reviews
Compliance standards, native integrations, support SLAs, deployment type, and ideal headcount for Ashby vs Workable.
| Capability | Ashby | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance Standards | Compliance Standards:
| Compliance Standards:
|
| Native Integrations | Native Integrations:
| Native Integrations:
|
| Support & SLAs | Support & SLAs: Dedicated CSM, Ticketed support, Knowledge Base | Support & SLAs: Live Chat, Dedicated CSM (Premier+), Knowledge Base |
| Deployment Type | Deployment Type: Cloud / SaaS | Deployment Type: Cloud / SaaS / Mobile Native |
| Ideal Headcount | Ideal Headcount: 50–250 seats | Ideal Headcount: 1–50 seats |
The bottom line for Enterprise
Ashby is the top-recommended platform for Enterprise. It is the stronger overall fit for this workflow. Workable is the stronger alternative when you need built-in ai candidate sourcing.
Detailed capability breakdown tailored for Enterprise. Checkmarks indicate native platform support, while crosses highlight functional gaps or required third-party integrations.
| Capability | Ashby | Workable |
|---|---|---|
| Structured scorecards | Structured scorecards plus AI interview summaries; scorecard rigor is configurable rather than Greenhouse-hardcoded methodology. | Scorecards are basic. Workable is job-board + AI sourcing, not Greenhouse structured hiring. |
| Sourcing CRM & client portals | Native sourcing CRM, pipeline analytics, and unlimited seats on Foundations (flat fee to 100 employees). | No full candidate CRM. AI sourcing database (400M+ profiles) substitutes for Lever-style nurture. |
| Scheduling & async video | Multi-time-zone self-scheduling with interviewer load analytics; not a separate Calendly dependency. | Self-scheduling included; async video and SMS texting are paid add-ons. |
| Career site & job boards | No one-click 200-board syndication like Workable. Career site is first-party; job boards are integrations. | One-click syndication to 200+ job boards is the SMB acquisition engine. |
| EEO / OFCCP compliance | GDPR plus analytics for enterprise talent ops; OFCCP audit files still trail Greenhouse Structured Hiring. | Not the OFCCP system of record. Video/SMS add-ons also keep total cost above the $299 headline. |
| Reporting & analytics | Recruiting analytics are the product: funnel conversion, source ROI, and pipeline velocity in-product. | Operational reports only; no Ashby-style recruiting data warehouse in-product. |
| Checkr, SMS & integrations | Modern HRIS/assessment connectors; Checkr is not a native matrix item; background checks are partner/integration, not Greenhouse-deep. | Background-check integrations plus job boards; SMS/video interview modules are add-on SKUs. |
| Seat / usage pricing | $400/month Foundations flat fee to 100 employees, unlimited recruiter seats, no published free trial. | Standard from $299/month (1–20 employees) with a published free trial; texting/video extra. |
For Enterprise, stage automation has to survive requisition freezes, adverse-impact funnel files, and executive-search bypasses. Ashby vs Workable cannot treat a sourcing extension as the system of record if OFCCP needs a reconstructable pipeline Enterprise can hand legal.
For Enterprise, structured interview kits are an audit artifact. Ashby or Workable must enforce scorecards, store GDPR candidate consent with the application, and prove every interviewer used the same kit. Feedback loops that live in email are a works-council finding waiting to happen.
For Enterprise, the offer approval chain includes compensation-committee signoff, legal, and sometimes a works council. Ashby vs Workable has to freeze the offer letter until that chain clears and still log who approved what. A self-serve send is a policy breach Enterprise will not survive.
For Enterprise, stage automation must survive requisition freezes, adverse-impact funnel files, and OFCCP reconstruction. Ashby vs Workable cannot let a sourcing extension be the system of record. Adverse-impact reporting on the pipeline is a buying criterion Enterprise legal will raise in the RFP.
For Enterprise, structured interview kits are evidence. Ashby vs Workable must store GDPR candidate consent with the application and prove every interviewer used the same kit. Feedback loops in email are a works-council issue Enterprise will not accept.
For Enterprise, the offer approval chain includes compensation-committee signoff, legal, and sometimes a works council. Ashby vs Workable has to freeze the offer letter until that chain clears and log approvers. A self-serve send is a policy breach Enterprise procurement will reject.
Ready to act on this Enterprise evaluation of Ashby vs Workable?