Workable vs its rivals

Side-by-side comparison against Workable's closest competitors — identity, store metrics, ratings & sentiment, and strategic intel.

Workable
This App
Sempre JBS
Contender
Core Identity
DeveloperWorkable Ltd.Uber Technologies, Inc.LegalMatchPINENATIVE LTDJBS SAMedical SolutionsGreenhouse Software IncZoomInfoBullhornBreezy HR Inc.
CategoryProductivityBusinessBusinessBusinessBusinessMedicalBusinessBusinessProductivityProductivity
PlatformAndroid, iOSAndroid, iOSiOS, AndroidAndroid, iOSAndroidiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOS
Store Metrics
Rating4.3 / 54.4 / 55.0 / 54.9 / 54.4 / 52.2 / 52.1 / 54.6 / 53.3 / 54.6 / 5
Ratings Count99651,3642441,8601435796959341
PriceFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFree
Release DateNov 16, 2016Oct 18, 2016Apr 7, 2026May 2, 2024Aug 31, 2021Aug 27, 2019May 20, 2016Jan 5, 2020Jul 31, 2018May 4, 2015
Last UpdatedMay 13, 2026May 11, 2026May 11, 2026Mar 4, 2026May 11, 2026Apr 15, 2026Jan 13, 2026May 4, 2026May 5, 2026May 19, 2026
Sentiment & Reviews
Sentiment-terrible---terribleterriblemixedmixed-
Score-15/100---15/10015/10065/10050/100-
Praises-
  • Core ride-sharing functionality provides a reliable income stream for drivers who prioritize consistent trip volume
---
  • Job search functionality provides value for travelers looking for new assignments
  • Daily usage for interview preparation and candidate feedback remains the core functional anchor for users
  • Access to direct decision-maker contact information
--
Complaints-
  • Automated support responses and lack of human intervention prevent resolution of account deactivation and payment disputes
---
  • Excessive app lag and unresponsive touch inputs make timecard entry nearly impossible
  • Redundant payroll processes force users to perform manual data entry multiple times
  • Lack of core administrative actions forces users to switch to desktop browsers for basic tasks
  • Android stability and UI regressions
--
Requests-
  • Transparent fare structures that account for rising fuel costs and provide fair compensation for long-distance trips
---
  • Return to web-based or email-based timecard submission to bypass mobile application failures
  • Full parity with desktop features including candidate status updates and social media referral sharing
---
Strategic Intel
Strengths
  • AI-assisted sourcing database of 400M profiles
  • Centralized HRIS and payroll integration lock-in
  • Gamified employee referral retention loops
  • Global brand scale provides consistent trip volume
  • Instant Pay liquidity feature drives high acquisition
  • Multi-vertical support allows flexible earnings
  • B2B utility model ensures high-intent user retention
  • Specialized legal-industry workflows provide a focused experience
--
  • 24-hour support line protects placement revenue
  • Exclusive clinician discount program supports retention
  • Structured hiring methodology embeds into enterprise workflows to reduce churn
  • AI-assisted candidate summaries differentiate from legacy applicant tracking systems
  • Triple-layer fraud detection increases switching costs for enterprise clients
  • Proprietary B2B contact database functions as a primary distribution barrier.
  • Buyer intent signals provide high-value lead intelligence that justifies enterprise-tier pricing.
  • Deep integration with staffing-specific workflows like internal submissions
  • Mobile-native record management for candidates and contacts
  • Intuitive drag-and-drop pipeline management sustains high user satisfaction
  • Collaborative hiring tools drive internal team adoption
Weaknesses
  • 0.8★ Android-iOS rating gap
  • Limited vertical-specific compliance modules
  • 15-day trial conversion friction
  • Automated support bot loop prevents dispute resolution
  • Fare transparency decline reduces per-mile profitability
  • Algorithmic navigation errors cause operational friction
  • 0-rating on Android platform signals adoption friction
  • No credential management features present in competitor apps
--
  • Timecard entry failure blocks core revenue workflow
  • 0.69★ Android-iOS rating gap indicates platform instability
  • 2.1-star rating indicates severe mobile usability friction
  • Lack of candidate status updates forces desktop-only workflow
  • Persistent login failures prevent reliable access to scorecards
  • 1.64-star Android-iOS rating gap indicates a failure to maintain mobile parity.
  • Reliance on enterprise-grade subscriptions limits the user base to high-budget organizations.
  • 2.3 rating on Android indicates significant UI/UX friction
  • Lack of AI-driven fraud detection compared to Greenhouse
  • Absence of proprietary contact databases limits sourcing
  • Lack of AI-driven candidate matching trails industry standards
Pricingfreemiumfreefreefreefreefreesubscriptionfreemiumsubscriptionfreemium
MomentumMaintenanceActiveMaintenance--MaintenanceMaintenanceMaintenanceMaintenanceMaintenance
Update Cadence2 versions, 2 majors/6mo, ~1d avg5 versions, ~9d avg2 versions, 2 majors/6mo, ~4d avg--2 versions, ~1d avg2 versions, ~14d avg2 versions, ~0d avg2 versions, ~7d avg1 versions

Compare Workable head-to-head

Disclosure: Independent intel to help mobile builders succeed.

AI-powered analysis with editorial review, built from publicly available sources. Marlvel.ai is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Workable, its developer, the app publisher, Apple, or Google Play. All trademarks, logos, and screenshots referenced remain the property of their respective owners.

Data licensed under CC-BY-NC 4.0