§ The result
Bryq leads Thomas International on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Bryq scores 57 and Thomas International 48 under rubric v1.0 — a 9-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. Bryq leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Thomas International is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Bryq leads is Human Oversight Design, Bryq 54 to Thomas International 51. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Bryq 70, Thomas International 43 — and at an 18% weight it carries 52% of the weighted advantage Bryq holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Bryq
Bryq is a science-based talent-intelligence platform whose core product is a short, blind, chatbot-driven pre-hire assessment scoring candidates on cognitive ability, personality/behavioral traits, and job skills to produce a job-fit "match" score used for hiring and internal mobility.
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
Bryq and Thomas International are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Bryq | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 52% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Bryq 70 · Thomas International 43
4.9 weighted points to Bryq
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Bryq 55 · Thomas International 40
1.8 weighted points to Bryq
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Bryq 40 · Thomas International 33
1.1 weighted points to Bryq
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Bryq 62 · Thomas International 57
0.8 weighted points to Bryq
8% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Bryq 66 · Thomas International 60
0.5 weighted points to Bryq
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Bryq 54 · Thomas International 51
0.4 weighted points to Bryq
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +9.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +9 beside that +9.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Bryq minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Bryq | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 54 | 54 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 70 | 43 | +27 | +4.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 57 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 54 | 51 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 55 | 40 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 66 | 60 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 57 (F) | 48 (F) | +9 | +9.3 |
§ 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 | Bryq | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources 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 domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 20 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Bryq has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 20 with a source URL, 4 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 Bryq sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for Bryq, across 4 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Bryq last reviewed
- July 17, 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