§ The result
Checkr leads Pin on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Checkr sits 14 points above Pin under rubric v1.0 — 54 against 40 — with Checkr filed under Screening and Pin under Sourcing. Checkr leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Pin is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Checkr leads is FRIA Support, Checkr 32 to Pin 30. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Checkr 70, Pin 30) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 59% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 6 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
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
§ The record
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Pin under Candidate sourcing 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 | Pin |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Low |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2014 | 2024 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · Pin 30
8.0 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · Pin 50
1.9 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · Pin 50
1.8 weighted points to Checkr
8% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · Pin 55
1.0 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · Pin 45
0.6 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · Pin 30
0.3 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +13.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +14 beside that +13.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus Pin.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | Pin | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 30 | +40 | +8.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 30 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 50 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 50 | +16 | +1.9 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 45 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 55 | +13 | +1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 40 (F) | +14 | +13.7 |
§ 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 | Pin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 32 | 5 | 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; Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 65 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Pin 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