HomeCompareCheckr vs Glider AI

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Checkr vs Glider AI

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

2 points separate Checkr and Glider AI.

Checkr holds a 2-point edge over Glider AI under rubric v1.0, 54 to 52, across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. Glider AI takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 5 for Checkr, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Glider AI — Checkr 35, Glider AI 68, on an 18% weight — which is 93% of the weighted advantage Glider AI holds across the 2 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Glider AI 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 Glider AI is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCheckrGlider AI
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20142020

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 41% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Checkr 35 · Glider AI 68

    5.9 weighted points to Glider AI

  2. 20% weight · 66% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Checkr 70 · Glider AI 52

    3.6 weighted points to Checkr

  3. 12% weight · 76% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Checkr 66 · Glider AI 55

    1.3 weighted points to Checkr

  4. 15% weight · 84% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Checkr 62 · Glider AI 54

    1.2 weighted points to Checkr

  5. 12% weight · 92% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Checkr 50 · Glider AI 40

    1.2 weighted points to Checkr

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Checkr 68 · Glider AI 60

    0.6 weighted points to Checkr

  7. 15% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Checkr 32 · Glider AI 35

    0.4 weighted points to Glider AI

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +2 beside that +1.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Checkr minus Glider AI.

CategoryWeightCheckrGlider AIΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%7052+18+3.6
Bias Audit Transparency18%3568-33-5.9
FRIA Support15%3235-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%6254+8+1.2
Human Oversight Design12%6655+11+1.3
Post-Market Monitoring12%5040+10+1.2
Customer Documentation8%6860+8+0.6
Total100%54 (F)52 (F)+2+1.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCheckrGlider AI
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%32Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain31Audit reportSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%40Sources on the vendor's own domain61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
All criteria100%246Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain276Audit 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; Glider AI has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Glider AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 33 for Glider AI, across 4 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Checkr last reviewed
August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Glider AI 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.