§ The result
3 points separate Thomas International and Clevry.
Under rubric v1.0, Thomas International and Clevry finish 3 points apart, 48 to 45, as two Assessment entries. Thomas International leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Clevry leads 1, including Human Oversight Design, and 1 is level. The advantage Thomas International holds is spread out: Post-Market Monitoring is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Clevry 30, Thomas International 40, 12% weight), yet it supplies only 37% of the weighted points Thomas International gains across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Clevry
Clevry is a UK psychometric assessment platform offering norm-referenced personality questionnaires, cognitive ability tests and situational judgement tests, plus recorded one-way video interviews, an interview builder, a skills-first ATS and an AI tool that maps job ads onto its personality scale library.
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
Clevry and Thomas International are both filed under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Clevry | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 1991 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 29% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Clevry 30 · Thomas International 40
1.2 weighted points to Thomas International
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Clevry 38 · Thomas International 43
0.9 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Clevry 58 · Thomas International 51
0.8 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Clevry 30 · Thomas International 33
0.4 weighted points to Thomas International
20% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Clevry 52 · Thomas International 54
0.4 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Clevry 55 · Thomas International 57
0.3 weighted points to Thomas International
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -2.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -2.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Clevry minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Clevry | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 54 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 43 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 33 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 51 | +7 | +0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 40 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 48 (F) | -3 | -2.4 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | Clevry | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 39 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Clevry has 44 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 39 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 Clevry sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 61 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 44 for Clevry, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Clevry 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