HomeCompareCrosschq vs TalentLens

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Crosschq vs TalentLens

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

1 point separates Crosschq and TalentLens.

Crosschq holds a 1-point edge over TalentLens under rubric v1.0, 47 to 46, across the Screening and Assessment cohorts. TalentLens takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Bias Audit Transparency among them, against 4 for Crosschq, whose share includes Data Governance Disclosure, and 1 is level. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — TalentLens takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Crosschq 38 to TalentLens 45, 76% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Data Governance Disclosure, Crosschq 58 to TalentLens 50.

§ The record

Crosschq is filed under Screening AI, TalentLens under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCrosschqTalentLens
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded2018Not recorded

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 27% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Crosschq 38 · TalentLens 45

    1.3 weighted points to TalentLens

  2. 15% weight · 52% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Crosschq 58 · TalentLens 50

    1.2 weighted points to Crosschq

  3. 12% weight · 72% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Crosschq 40 · TalentLens 32

    1.0 weighted points to Crosschq

  4. 12% weight · 85% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Crosschq 62 · TalentLens 57

    0.6 weighted points to Crosschq

  5. 20% weight · 93% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Crosschq 50 · TalentLens 52

    0.4 weighted points to TalentLens

  6. 8% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Crosschq 62 · TalentLens 58

    0.3 weighted points to Crosschq

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +1.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.4.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Crosschq minus TalentLens.

CategoryWeightCrosschqTalentLensΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5052-2-0.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%3845-7-1.3
FRIA Support15%3030--
Data Governance Disclosure15%5850+8+1.2
Human Oversight Design12%6257+5+0.6
Post-Market Monitoring12%4032+8+1.0
Customer Documentation8%6258+4+0.3
Total100%47 (F)46 (F)+1+1.4

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCrosschqTalentLens
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%61Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%61Sources on the vendor's own domain31Audit reportSources 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%70Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain40Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%70Sources on the vendor's own domain40Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%41Sources on the vendor's own domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%61Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%385Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain245Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Crosschq has 43 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 38 with a source URL, 5 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 Crosschq and TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 72 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 43 for Crosschq, across 3 distinct source domains, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Crosschq 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.