§ The result
2 points separate Checkr and HiredScore.
Checkr (Screening) edges HiredScore (Sourcing) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 54 to 52. Checkr leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while HiredScore leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to HiredScore — Checkr 35, HiredScore 55, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage HiredScore holds across the 1 criterion 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
HiredScore
AI-driven talent orchestration layer that ranks and routes candidates within an existing ATS. Acquired by Workday in 2024.
§ The record
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, HiredScore under Candidate sourcing AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Colorado AI Act. Only Checkr is in scope of Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Checkr | HiredScore |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 40% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · HiredScore 55
3.6 weighted points to HiredScore
12% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · HiredScore 35
1.8 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · HiredScore 55
1.1 weighted points to Checkr
20% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · HiredScore 65
1.0 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · HiredScore 60
0.7 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · HiredScore 60
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · HiredScore 30
0.3 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.1 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 +1.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus HiredScore.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | HiredScore | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 65 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 55 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 55 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 60 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 35 | +15 | +1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 52 (F) | +2 | +1.9 |
§ 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 | HiredScore | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 2 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; HiredScore has 9 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 7 with a source URL, 2 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HiredScore sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 9 for HiredScore, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- HiredScore last reviewed
- May 21, 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