§ The result
Sense leads Lever on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Sense scores 58 and Lever 49 under rubric v1.0, a 9-point gap across the Screening and ATS-integrated cohorts. Sense leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Lever is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Sense leads is Human Oversight Design, Lever 60 to Sense 64. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Lever 42, Sense 72 — and at an 18% weight it carries 57% of the weighted advantage Sense holds across the 6 criteria on that side of the table.
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.
Vendor profile
Sense
Sense is a conversational AI talent engagement platform that screens, scores, matches, and schedules candidates for high-volume recruiting via chatbot, SMS/WhatsApp, and voice AI on top of a customer's ATS.
§ The record
Lever is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Sense under Screening AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Sourcing.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773.
| Record | Lever | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 57% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Lever 42 · Sense 72
5.4 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Lever 52 · Sense 60
1.6 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Lever 32 · Sense 38
0.9 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Lever 45 · Sense 52
0.8 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Lever 60 · Sense 64
0.5 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Lever 58 · Sense 62
0.3 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -9.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -9 beside that -9.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Lever minus Sense.
| Category | Weight | Lever | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 60 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 72 | -30 | -5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 38 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 58 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 52 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 58 (F) | -9 | -9.5 |
§ 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 | Lever | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate 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% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 13 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Lever has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Lever and Sense sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 38 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Lever, across 2 distinct source domains, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Lever last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Sense 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