§ The result
4 points separate HiringBranch and Thomas International.
Within the Assessment cohort, HiringBranch edges Thomas International by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 52 to 48. HiringBranch leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Thomas International leads 1, including Data Governance Disclosure, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HiringBranch 60, Thomas International 43 — and at an 18% weight it carries 61% of the weighted advantage HiringBranch holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiringBranch
HiringBranch is an AI skills-assessment platform that measures 50+ communication and soft skills from candidates' open-ended, conversational job-simulation responses (text and voice) to screen and rank applicants for customer-facing roles.
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
HiringBranch and Thomas International 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 | HiringBranch | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | CA | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
HiringBranch 60 · Thomas International 43
3.1 weighted points to HiringBranch
20% weight · 80% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiringBranch 60 · Thomas International 54
1.2 weighted points to HiringBranch
8% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiringBranch 64 · Thomas International 60
0.3 weighted points to HiringBranch
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiringBranch 35 · Thomas International 33
0.3 weighted points to HiringBranch
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiringBranch 55 · Thomas International 57
0.3 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiringBranch 52 · Thomas International 51
0.1 weighted points to HiringBranch
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +4.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +4.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiringBranch minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | HiringBranch | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 54 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 60 | 43 | +17 | +3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 51 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 52 (F) | 48 (F) | +4 | +4.7 |
§ 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 | HiringBranch | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HiringBranch has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 36 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for HiringBranch, across 1 distinct source domain, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiringBranch last reviewed
- July 17, 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