Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Checkr vs Plum
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.
Substantial gaps
Screening
Plum
Plum is a pre-employment talent assessment platform that uses a Five-Factor (Big Five) psychometric Discovery Survey and a Talent Match model to score and rank candidates on behavioral "durable skills" for role fit, hiring, and development.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
Checkr and Plum tie at 54.
Checkr, filed under Screening, and Plum, filed under Assessment, tie at 54 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. Checkr leads 6 of the 7 criteria and Plum 1, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Checkr 35, Plum 83 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage Plum holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Checkr6
- Plum1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency35 vs 83
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Plum under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of
Only Plum is in scope of
| Record | Checkr | Plum |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | CA |
| Founded | 2014 | 2012 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight52% of the movement so far
Checkr35Plum838.6 weighted points to Plum
- 2
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight67% of the movement so far
Checkr70Plum582.4 weighted points to Checkr
- 3
Human Oversight Design
12% weight77% of the movement so far
Checkr66Plum521.7 weighted points to Checkr
- 4
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight87% of the movement so far
Checkr50Plum361.7 weighted points to Checkr
- 5
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight94% of the movement so far
Checkr62Plum541.2 weighted points to Checkr
- 6
FRIA Support
15% weight98% of the movement so far
Checkr32Plum280.6 weighted points to Checkr
- 7
Customer Documentation
8% weight100% of the movement so far
Checkr68Plum630.4 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -0.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 16.6 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads 0 beside that -0.7.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus Plum, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | Plum | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 58 | +12 | +2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 83 | -48 | -8.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 28 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 54 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 52 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 36 | +14 | +1.7 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 63 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 54F | 54F | - | -0.7 |
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 | Plum | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own 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 | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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 | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 15 | 4 | 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; Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Plum, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Plum last reviewed
- June 7, 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.