HomeCompareCheckr vs Infor Talent Science

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Checkr vs Infor Talent Science

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Checkr leads Infor Talent Science by 5 points.

Under rubric v1.0, Checkr, filed under Screening, finishes on 54 and Infor Talent Science, filed under Assessment, on 49, 5 points apart. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Checkr: Checkr is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Infor Talent Science on Bias Audit Transparency. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Checkr 66, Infor Talent Science 50) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Checkr 70, Infor Talent Science 58), the second being 38% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Infor Talent Science 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 Infor Talent Science is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCheckrInfor Talent Science
Price tierMidEnterprise
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded20142002

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 30% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Checkr 70 · Infor Talent Science 58

    2.4 weighted points to Checkr

  2. 12% weight · 54% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Checkr 66 · Infor Talent Science 50

    1.9 weighted points to Checkr

  3. 18% weight · 70% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Checkr 35 · Infor Talent Science 42

    1.3 weighted points to Infor Talent Science

  4. 15% weight · 79% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Checkr 62 · Infor Talent Science 57

    0.8 weighted points to Checkr

  5. 8% weight · 87% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Checkr 68 · Infor Talent Science 60

    0.6 weighted points to Checkr

  6. 12% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Checkr 50 · Infor Talent Science 45

    0.6 weighted points to Checkr

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

    FRIA Support

    Checkr 32 · Infor Talent Science 35

    0.4 weighted points to Infor Talent Science

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +4.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Checkr minus Infor Talent Science.

CategoryWeightCheckrInfor Talent ScienceΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%7058+12+2.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%3542-7-1.3
FRIA Support15%3235-3-0.4
Data Governance Disclosure15%6257+5+0.8
Human Oversight Design12%6650+16+1.9
Post-Market Monitoring12%5045+5+0.6
Customer Documentation8%6860+8+0.6
Total100%54 (F)49 (F)+5+4.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCheckrInfor Talent Science
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%32Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%40Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain51Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%246Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain277Sources on the vendor's own domain

Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 62 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Checkr last reviewed
August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Infor Talent Science 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.