§ The result
Checkr leads micro1 on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Checkr opens an 18-point lead on micro1, 54 to 36, with both scored in the Screening cohort. Checkr leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them; micro1 leads none. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Checkr 50, micro1 25) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Checkr 70, micro1 50), 23% of the weighted advantage Checkr builds across the 7 criteria it leads.
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
micro1
Zara, micro1's LLM-based AI interviewer, runs recorded, adaptive spoken interviews (with optional coding exercises and automated proctoring) and returns per-skill proficiency ratings, soft-skill ratings and a proctoring score; micro1 uses it to certify experts for its own AI-training talent network, and employers can use it through a client portal and API.
§ The record
Checkr and micro1 are both filed under Screening 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 micro1 is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Checkr | micro1 |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 23% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · micro1 50
4.0 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · micro1 25
3.0 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 55% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · micro1 20
2.7 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · micro1 45
2.5 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · micro1 48
2.2 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · micro1 45
1.8 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · micro1 22
1.5 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +17.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +18 beside that +17.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus micro1.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | micro1 | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 50 | +20 | +4.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 20 | +15 | +2.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 22 | +10 | +1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 45 | +17 | +2.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 48 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 25 | +25 | +3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 45 | +23 | +1.8 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 36 (F) | +18 | +17.8 |
§ 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 | micro1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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 | 2 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 25 | 8 | Sources 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; micro1 has 33 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for micro1 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 micro1, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- micro1 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