§ The result
4 points separate Checkr and Paycom.
Checkr (Screening) edges Paycom (ATS-integrated) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 54 to 50. Checkr leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Paycom leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency, and 1 is level. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Checkr 50, Paycom 38, 12% weight), but it accounts for only 35% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 5 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
Paycom
Paycom is a single-database human capital management and payroll platform whose applicant tracking system automates recruiting with resume parsing, keyword/knockout candidate filtering, automated correspondence, generative job-description writing, and a command-driven AI data-query engine (IWant).
§ The record
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Paycom under ATS-integrated 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.
| Record | Checkr | Paycom |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 1998 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 31% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · Paycom 38
1.4 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · Paycom 55
1.3 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · Paycom 60
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · Paycom 38
0.5 weighted points to Paycom
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · Paycom 68
0.4 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · Paycom 30
0.3 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus Paycom.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | Paycom | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 68 | +2 | +0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 38 | -3 | -0.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 62 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 55 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 60 | +8 | +0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 50 (F) | +4 | +3.6 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Checkr | Paycom | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 7 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Paycom has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 20 for Paycom, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Paycom 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