HomeCompareDice vs Thomas International

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Dice vs Thomas International

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Thomas International leads Dice by 12 points.

Thomas International, filed under Assessment, comes out 12 points above Dice, filed under Sourcing: 48 against 36 under rubric v1.0. Thomas International leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Dice leads 1, including Human Oversight Design. The advantage Thomas International holds is spread out: Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Dice 32, Thomas International 54, 20% weight), yet it supplies only 37% of the weighted points Thomas International gains across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Dice is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Thomas International under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.

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

RecordDiceThomas International
Price tierMidMid
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded19901981

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 35% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Dice 32 · Thomas International 54

    4.4 weighted points to Thomas International

  2. 18% weight · 61% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Dice 25 · Thomas International 43

    3.2 weighted points to Thomas International

  3. 15% weight · 75% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Dice 45 · Thomas International 57

    1.8 weighted points to Thomas International

  4. 15% weight · 85% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Dice 25 · Thomas International 33

    1.2 weighted points to Thomas International

  5. 8% weight · 91% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Dice 50 · Thomas International 60

    0.8 weighted points to Thomas International

  6. 12% weight · 96% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Dice 35 · Thomas International 40

    0.6 weighted points to Thomas International

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Dice 55 · Thomas International 51

    0.5 weighted points to Dice

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -11.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -11.6.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Dice minus Thomas International.

CategoryWeightDiceThomas InternationalΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%3254-22-4.4
Bias Audit Transparency18%2543-18-3.2
FRIA Support15%2533-8-1.2
Data Governance Disclosure15%4557-12-1.8
Human Oversight Design12%5551+4+0.5
Post-Market Monitoring12%3540-5-0.6
Customer Documentation8%5060-10-0.8
Total100%36 (F)48 (F)-12-11.6

§ 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.

CriterionWeightDiceThomas International
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%31—11Sources on the vendor's own domain
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain30Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%51Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%51Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%257Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain116Sources on the vendor's own domain

Dice has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 with a source URL, 7 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 Dice sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 32 for Dice, across 4 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Dice 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.