§ The result
Checkr leads Clevry by 9 points.
Checkr scores 54 and Clevry 45 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Checkr leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Clevry leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Article 11 Technical Documentation, at 20%, is the heaviest weighted swing and goes to Checkr (Checkr 70, Clevry 52), 40% of the weighted advantage it holds, while the widest raw gap is Post-Market Monitoring, Checkr 50 to Clevry 30.
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.
Vendor profile
Clevry
Clevry is a UK psychometric assessment platform offering norm-referenced personality questionnaires, cognitive ability tests and situational judgement tests, plus recorded one-way video interviews, an interview builder, a skills-first ATS and an AI tool that maps job ads onto its personality scale library.
§ The record
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Clevry under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Clevry is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Checkr | Clevry |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 1991 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · Clevry 52
3.6 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · Clevry 30
2.4 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · Clevry 55
1.1 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · Clevry 58
1.0 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · Clevry 60
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · Clevry 38
0.5 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · Clevry 30
0.3 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.5 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 +8.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus Clevry.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | Clevry | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 52 | +18 | +3.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 30 | +20 | +2.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 45 (F) | +9 | +8.4 |
§ 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 | Checkr | Clevry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 39 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Clevry has 44 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 39 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Clevry sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 72 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 44 for Clevry, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Clevry last reviewed
- September 25, 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