§ The result
2 points separate Textkernel and Lever.
Textkernel (Sourcing) edges Lever (ATS-integrated) by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 51 to 49. Textkernel leads 3 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Lever leads 2, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 2 are level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Lever 42, Textkernel 55 — and at an 18% weight it carries 72% of the weighted advantage Textkernel holds across the 3 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
Textkernel
Textkernel provides AI-powered CV/resume and job parsing, semantic search, and candidate-job matching technology (including the acquired Sovren engine) embedded inside ATS, job board, and HR systems.
§ The record
Lever is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Textkernel under Candidate sourcing 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.
| Record | Lever | Textkernel |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | US | NL |
| Founded | 2012 | 2001 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Lever 42 · Textkernel 55
2.3 weighted points to Textkernel
20% weight · 68% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Lever 52 · Textkernel 55
0.6 weighted points to Textkernel
12% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Lever 45 · Textkernel 40
0.6 weighted points to Lever
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Lever 58 · Textkernel 55
0.4 weighted points to Lever
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Lever 58 · Textkernel 62
0.3 weighted points to Textkernel
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -2.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 4.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -2.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Lever minus Textkernel.
| Category | Weight | Lever | Textkernel | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 55 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 55 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 32 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 55 | +3 | +0.4 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 62 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 51 (F) | -2 | -2.2 |
§ 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 | Textkernel | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | 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% | 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 | 13 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Lever has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Textkernel has 18 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 13 with a source URL, 5 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 37 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Lever, across 2 distinct source domains, and 18 for Textkernel, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Lever last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Textkernel 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