§ The result
Classet leads Thomas International by 7 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Classet, filed under Screening, finishes on 55 and Thomas International, filed under Assessment, on 48, 7 points apart. Classet leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Thomas International leads 1, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Classet 76, Thomas International 43 — and at an 18% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage Classet holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Classet
Classet's AI voice recruiter, Joy, phones hourly and frontline applicants within about a minute of applying, runs employer-scripted screening interviews with binary knockout questions, and sends recruiters recordings, transcripts, summaries and a qualified/unqualified outcome, either in Classet's lightweight ATS or in 100+ connected ATSs.
Vendor profile
Thomas International
Thomas International provides psychometric and aptitude assessments (behaviour/DISC, cognitive ability, personality and emotional intelligence) with an AI coaching layer, used for hiring, candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Classet is filed under Screening AI, Thomas International 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 Thomas International is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Classet | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2021 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Classet 76 · Thomas International 43
5.9 weighted points to Classet
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Classet 58 · Thomas International 40
2.2 weighted points to Classet
20% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Classet 46 · Thomas International 54
1.6 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Classet 55 · Thomas International 51
0.5 weighted points to Classet
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Classet 62 · Thomas International 60
0.2 weighted points to Classet
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +7.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +7 beside that +7.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Classet minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Classet | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 46 | 54 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 76 | 43 | +33 | +5.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 33 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 51 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 58 | 40 | +18 | +2.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 48 (F) | +7 | +7.1 |
§ 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 | Classet | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Classet has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Classet sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for Classet, across 3 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Classet last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Thomas International 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