§ The result
Infor Talent Science leads HighMatch by 6 points.
Infor Talent Science scores 49 and HighMatch 43 under rubric v1.0 — a 6-point gap inside the Assessment cohort. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Infor Talent Science: Infor Talent Science is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and HighMatch on Human Oversight Design. Even Article 11 Technical Documentation, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (HighMatch 45, Infor Talent Science 58, 20% weight), is only 37% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
HighMatch
HighMatch sells pre-employment assessments built by I-O psychologists (personality, cognitive, skills, situational judgment, culture fit and minimum-qualification screens), including the Berke Assessment for small businesses, that score candidates against weighted, role-specific hiring profiles and return job-fit scores, trait reports and tailored interview guides.
Vendor profile
Infor Talent Science
Infor Talent Science is a cloud-based pre-hire behavioral and cognitive assessment platform. It scores candidates against patented machine-learning 'Performance Profiles' built from the behavior and performance data of an employer's successful incumbents, and gives hiring teams fit scores, recommendations and interview questions that are used to rank and route applicants.
§ The record
HighMatch and Infor Talent Science are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HighMatch | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2005 | 2002 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HighMatch 45 · Infor Talent Science 58
2.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HighMatch 30 · Infor Talent Science 42
2.2 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HighMatch 60 · Infor Talent Science 50
1.2 weighted points to HighMatch
15% weight · 82% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HighMatch 30 · Infor Talent Science 35
0.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HighMatch 52 · Infor Talent Science 57
0.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HighMatch 40 · Infor Talent Science 45
0.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HighMatch 58 · Infor Talent Science 60
0.2 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HighMatch minus Infor Talent Science.
| Category | Weight | HighMatch | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 52 | 57 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 50 | +10 | +1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 49 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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.
| Criterion | Weight | HighMatch | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 5 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HighMatch has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for HighMatch sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 69 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for HighMatch, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HighMatch last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Infor Talent Science 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.
§ Where next