§ The result
Bullhorn leads Thomas International by 6 points.
Bullhorn scores 54 and Thomas International 48 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Bullhorn leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Thomas International leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Bullhorn 58, Thomas International 43 — and at an 18% weight it carries 41% of the weighted advantage Bullhorn holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Bullhorn
Bullhorn is a cloud-based applicant tracking system and CRM for staffing and recruiting agencies, with AI features (Bullhorn Copilot/Amplify, automation, and Textkernel-powered search and match) that source, screen, and rank candidates against jobs.
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
Bullhorn 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 | Bullhorn | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 1999 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Bullhorn 58 · Thomas International 43
2.7 weighted points to Bullhorn
20% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Bullhorn 62 · Thomas International 54
1.6 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Bullhorn 60 · Thomas International 51
1.1 weighted points to Bullhorn
15% weight · 85% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Bullhorn 38 · Thomas International 33
0.8 weighted points to Bullhorn
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Bullhorn 35 · Thomas International 40
0.6 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Bullhorn 60 · Thomas International 57
0.4 weighted points to Bullhorn
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +6.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +6 beside that +6.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Bullhorn minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Bullhorn | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 58 | 43 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 60 | 57 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 51 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 40 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 48 (F) | +6 | +6.0 |
§ 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 | Bullhorn | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 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 domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Bullhorn has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Bullhorn, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Bullhorn last reviewed
- June 7, 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