HomeCompareFindem vs TalentLens

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Findem vs TalentLens

Export comparison (CSV)Pro→

§ The result

Findem leads TalentLens on 6 of the 7 criteria.

Findem sits 12 points above TalentLens under rubric v1.0 — 58 against 46 — with Findem filed under Sourcing and TalentLens under Assessment. Findem leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so TalentLens is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Findem leads is Human Oversight Design, Findem 60 to TalentLens 57. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Findem 83, TalentLens 45) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 58% of the weighted advantage Findem holds across the 6 criteria it leads.

§ The record

Findem is filed under Candidate sourcing 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.

RecordFindemTalentLens
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersUSGB
Founded2019Not recorded

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 18% weight · 58% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Findem 83 · TalentLens 45

    6.8 weighted points to Findem

  2. 20% weight · 68% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Findem 58 · TalentLens 52

    1.2 weighted points to Findem

  3. 15% weight · 78% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Findem 38 · TalentLens 30

    1.2 weighted points to Findem

  4. 12% weight · 88% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Findem 42 · TalentLens 32

    1.2 weighted points to Findem

  5. 15% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Findem 57 · TalentLens 50

    1.1 weighted points to Findem

  6. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Findem 60 · TalentLens 57

    0.4 weighted points to Findem

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +11.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.8 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 +11.8.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Findem minus TalentLens.

CategoryWeightFindemTalentLensΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%5852+6+1.2
Bias Audit Transparency18%8345+38+6.8
FRIA Support15%3830+8+1.2
Data Governance Disclosure15%5750+7+1.1
Human Oversight Design12%6057+3+0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%4232+10+1.2
Customer Documentation8%5858--
Total100%58 (F)46 (F)+12+11.8

§ 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.

CriterionWeightFindemTalentLens
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%11Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain31Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
FRIA Support15%11—21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Data Governance Disclosure15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain40Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%10Sources on the vendor's own domain40Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Audit reportSources on a separate domain31Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain
Customer Documentation8%21Sources on the vendor's own domain41Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%125Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain245Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain

Findem has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 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 Findem and TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 46 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Findem, across 2 distinct source domains, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.

Rubric
v1.0
Findem last reviewed
June 7, 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.