§ The result
iCIMS leads Infor Talent Science by 6 points.
iCIMS scores 55 and Infor Talent Science 49 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. iCIMS leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Infor Talent Science leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 1 is level. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (iCIMS 68, Infor Talent Science 42) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 75% of the weighted advantage iCIMS holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
iCIMS
Enterprise talent-acquisition / applicant tracking platform (the iCIMS Talent Cloud) that adds optional AI features - Candidate Ranking, Talent Match, and a GPT-powered Copilot - to source, rank, and engage candidates.
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
iCIMS is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Infor Talent Science 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 Infor Talent Science is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | iCIMS | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2000 | 2002 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 69% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
iCIMS 68 · Infor Talent Science 42
4.7 weighted points to iCIMS
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
iCIMS 58 · Infor Talent Science 50
1.0 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
iCIMS 38 · Infor Talent Science 35
0.4 weighted points to iCIMS
12% weight · 95% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
iCIMS 42 · Infor Talent Science 45
0.4 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
8% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
iCIMS 62 · Infor Talent Science 60
0.2 weighted points to iCIMS
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
iCIMS 56 · Infor Talent Science 57
0.1 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.8 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 +5.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is iCIMS minus Infor Talent Science.
| Category | Weight | iCIMS | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 68 | 42 | +26 | +4.7 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 35 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 56 | 57 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 45 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 55 (F) | 49 (F) | +6 | +5.7 |
§ 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 | iCIMS | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
iCIMS has 24 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 24 for iCIMS, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- iCIMS last reviewed
- June 7, 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