§ The result
Checkr leads Brazen on all 7 criteria.
Checkr finishes 16 points clear of Brazen inside the Screening cohort under rubric v1.0: 54 against 38. Checkr leads every one of the 7 criteria, Brazen none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Bias Audit Transparency, Brazen 30 to Checkr 35. Article 11 Technical Documentation is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Brazen 40, Checkr 70, 20% weight), but it accounts for only 39% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Brazen
Brazen is a recruiting events platform (acquired by Radancy in 2023) that runs virtual and in-person hiring events with a recruiting chatbot, configurable knockout pre-screening, resume filtering, built-in candidate rankings/recommendations, and 1:1 text, audio, and video chats.
Vendor profile
Checkr
Checkr is an FCRA-regulated background screening platform that uses machine learning to parse, classify and standardize criminal, employment, education and motor-vehicle records, and to route them through customer-configured adjudication rulesets that flag candidates as eligible, review or escalated for employment decisions.
§ The record
Brazen and Checkr are both filed under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Brazen is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Brazen | Checkr |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2007 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Brazen 40 · Checkr 70
6.0 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 56% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Brazen 45 · Checkr 62
2.5 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Brazen 46 · Checkr 66
2.4 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Brazen 38 · Checkr 50
1.4 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Brazen 25 · Checkr 32
1.1 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Brazen 55 · Checkr 68
1.0 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Brazen 30 · Checkr 35
0.9 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -15.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -16 beside that -15.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Brazen minus Checkr.
| Category | Weight | Brazen | Checkr | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 70 | -30 | -6.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 62 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 46 | 66 | -20 | -2.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 50 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 68 | -13 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 54 (F) | -16 | -15.4 |
§ 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 | Brazen | Checkr | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 0 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 6 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Brazen has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 6 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 13 for Brazen, across 1 distinct source domain, and 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Brazen last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 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