§ The result
ClearCo (ClearCompany) and TalentLens tie at 46.
ClearCo (ClearCompany), filed under ATS-integrated, and TalentLens, filed under Assessment, tie at 46 under rubric v1.0 by different routes through the criteria. ClearCo (ClearCompany) leads 5 of the 7 criteria and TalentLens 1, with 1 level, yet the two totals land on the same number. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — ClearCo (ClearCompany) 28, TalentLens 45 — and at an 18% weight it carries 100% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
ClearCo (ClearCompany)
ClearCo (formerly ClearCompany) is a unified talent-management suite built around an applicant tracking system. Its AI Talent Match scores and ranks new applicants against a requisition's skills and job titles, and its Sourcing Agent runs AI-conducted phone screening calls and returns applicants ranked by score.
Vendor profile
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
§ The record
ClearCo (ClearCompany) is filed under ATS-integrated AI, TalentLens under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only TalentLens is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | TalentLens |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2004 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 48% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 28 · TalentLens 45
3.1 weighted points to TalentLens
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 57 · TalentLens 50
1.1 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
20% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 56 · TalentLens 52
0.8 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 63 · TalentLens 57
0.7 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 37 · TalentLens 32
0.6 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
ClearCo (ClearCompany) 60 · TalentLens 58
0.2 weighted points to ClearCo (ClearCompany)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +0.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 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 +0.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is ClearCo (ClearCompany) minus TalentLens.
| Category | Weight | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | TalentLens | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 56 | 52 | +4 | +0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 45 | -17 | -3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 50 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 57 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 37 | 32 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 58 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 46 (F) | - | +0.3 |
§ 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 | ClearCo (ClearCompany) | TalentLens | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 2 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
ClearCo (ClearCompany) has 38 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for ClearCo (ClearCompany) and TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 67 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 38 for ClearCo (ClearCompany), across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- ClearCo (ClearCompany) last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TalentLens 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.