HomeCompareCheckr vs Versant by Pearson

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Checkr vs Versant by Pearson

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Checkr leads Versant by Pearson by 5 points.

Under rubric v1.0, Checkr, filed under Screening, finishes on 54 and Versant by Pearson, filed under Assessment, on 49, 5 points apart. Versant by Pearson takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 6 for Checkr, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Human Oversight Design (Checkr 66, Versant by Pearson 56) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Checkr 70, Versant by Pearson 63), the second being 25% of the weighted advantage Checkr holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Versant by Pearson 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 Versant by Pearson is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCheckrVersant by Pearson
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded20141844

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

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

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Checkr 70 · Versant by Pearson 63

    1.4 weighted points to Checkr

  2. 15% weight · 40% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Checkr 62 · Versant by Pearson 53

    1.3 weighted points to Checkr

  3. 18% weight · 58% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Checkr 35 · Versant by Pearson 42

    1.3 weighted points to Versant by Pearson

  4. 12% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Checkr 66 · Versant by Pearson 56

    1.2 weighted points to Checkr

  5. 12% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Checkr 50 · Versant by Pearson 43

    0.8 weighted points to Checkr

  6. 8% weight · 96% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Checkr 68 · Versant by Pearson 61

    0.6 weighted points to Checkr

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

    FRIA Support

    Checkr 32 · Versant by Pearson 30

    0.3 weighted points to Checkr

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +4.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.9 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 +4.4.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Checkr minus Versant by Pearson.

CategoryWeightCheckrVersant by PearsonΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%7063+7+1.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%3542-7-1.3
FRIA Support15%3230+2+0.3
Data Governance Disclosure15%6253+9+1.3
Human Oversight Design12%6656+10+1.2
Post-Market Monitoring12%5043+7+0.8
Customer Documentation8%6861+7+0.6
Total100%54 (F)49 (F)+5+4.4

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCheckrVersant by Pearson
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%32Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 domain31Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%50Sources on the vendor's own domain50Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%31Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%246Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain236Sources 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; Versant by Pearson has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Versant by Pearson sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 57 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 29 for Versant by Pearson, across 2 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Checkr last reviewed
August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
Versant by Pearson 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.