§ The result
Lever leads impress.ai on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Lever sits 11 points above impress.ai under rubric v1.0 — 49 against 38 — with Lever filed under ATS-integrated and impress.ai under Screening. Lever leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so impress.ai is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Lever leads is Data Governance Disclosure, impress.ai 55 to Lever 58. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (impress.ai 22, Lever 42, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 33% of the weighted advantage Lever holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
impress.ai
impress.ai is a Singapore-headquartered recruitment automation platform that uses conversational AI assistants, resume parsing and scoring, and structured competency-based screening to filter, rank and shortlist job candidates, integrating with enterprise ATS systems.
Vendor profile
Lever
Lever is an AI-powered applicant tracking system and recruiting CRM that centralizes sourcing, candidate relationship management, AI candidate matching (Talent Fit), and hiring analytics for high-growth employers.
§ The record
impress.ai is filed under Screening AI, Lever under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only impress.ai is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | impress.ai | Lever |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | High | Mid |
| Headquarters | SG | US |
| Founded | 2017 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
impress.ai 22 · Lever 42
3.6 weighted points to Lever
20% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
impress.ai 35 · Lever 52
3.4 weighted points to Lever
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
impress.ai 32 · Lever 45
1.6 weighted points to Lever
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
impress.ai 25 · Lever 32
1.1 weighted points to Lever
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
impress.ai 52 · Lever 60
1.0 weighted points to Lever
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
impress.ai 55 · Lever 58
0.4 weighted points to Lever
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -11.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 11.0 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -11 beside that -11.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is impress.ai minus Lever.
| Category | Weight | impress.ai | Lever | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 35 | 52 | -17 | -3.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 22 | 42 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 32 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 45 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 38 (F) | 49 (F) | -11 | -11.0 |
§ 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 | impress.ai | Lever | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 18 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
impress.ai has 25 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 18 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Lever has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Lever sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 44 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 25 for impress.ai, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for Lever, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- impress.ai last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Lever last reviewed
- June 7, 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