§ The result
Thomas International takes the total, Avionté takes more of the criteria.
Thomas International (Assessment) edges Avionté (ATS-integrated) by 3 points under rubric v1.0, 48 to 45. Avionté leads more of the criteria than Thomas International — 4 to 3 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Thomas International leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Thomas International. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Avionté 22, Thomas International 43) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 77% of the weighted advantage Thomas International holds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Avionté
AviontéBOLD is a front- and back-office platform for staffing agencies (ATS/CRM, onboarding, payroll and billing): its AI Matching Agent ranks candidates already in an agency's database for each job, and its Claude-powered PIXEL chatbot pre-screens and scores applicants.
Vendor profile
Thomas International
Thomas International provides psychometric and aptitude assessments (behaviour/DISC, cognitive ability, personality and emotional intelligence) with an AI coaching layer, used for hiring, candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Avionté is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Thomas International under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Thomas International is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Avionté | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2005 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Avionté 22 · Thomas International 43
3.8 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Avionté 60 · Thomas International 51
1.1 weighted points to Avionté
20% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Avionté 50 · Thomas International 54
0.8 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Avionté 45 · Thomas International 40
0.6 weighted points to Avionté
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Avionté 35 · Thomas International 33
0.3 weighted points to Avionté
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Avionté 55 · Thomas International 57
0.3 weighted points to Thomas International
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Avionté 62 · Thomas International 60
0.2 weighted points to Avionté
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -2.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Avionté minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Avionté | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 54 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 43 | -21 | -3.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 51 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 48 (F) | -3 | -2.7 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Avionté | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Avionté has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Avionté sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 50 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 33 for Avionté, across 4 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Avionté last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Thomas International last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next