§ The result
Checkr leads DevSkiller on all 7 criteria.
Checkr finishes 15 points clear of DevSkiller under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 39 — across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Checkr leads every one of the 7 criteria, DevSkiller none of them, and the closest of the 7 is FRIA Support, Checkr 32 to DevSkiller 25. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Checkr 70, DevSkiller 35 — and at a 20% weight it carries 46% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
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
DevSkiller
DevSkiller (now branded SkillPanel) provides technical skills assessment and coding tests that automatically score developer candidates on real-world work-sample tasks using hidden verification unit tests and static code analysis.
§ The record
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, DevSkiller 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 DevSkiller is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Checkr | DevSkiller |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | PL |
| Founded | 2014 | 2014 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 46% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · DevSkiller 35
7.0 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · DevSkiller 22
2.3 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · DevSkiller 52
1.5 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · DevSkiller 55
1.3 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · DevSkiller 40
1.2 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · DevSkiller 25
1.1 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · DevSkiller 58
0.8 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +15.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 15.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +15 beside that +15.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus DevSkiller.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | DevSkiller | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 35 | +35 | +7.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 22 | +13 | +2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 25 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 52 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 40 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 58 | +10 | +0.8 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 39 (F) | +15 | +15.2 |
§ 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 | DevSkiller | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 4 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; DevSkiller has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for DevSkiller sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 43 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for DevSkiller, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- DevSkiller 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