§ The result
TalentLens leads Pin by 6 points.
TalentLens scores 46 and Pin 40 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Assessment and Sourcing cohorts. TalentLens leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Pin leads 1, including Post-Market Monitoring, and 2 are level. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Pin 30, TalentLens 52) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 60% of the weighted advantage TalentLens holds across the 4 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Pin
Pin is an AI recruiting agent that searches a database of 850M+ candidate profiles, scores and ranks candidates for fit, can automatically screen out non-matches (each with a one-line reason), and runs outreach and interview scheduling.
Vendor profile
TalentLens
TalentLens, Pearson's workplace psychometrics brand, publishes the Watson-Glaser critical-thinking test, Raven's Adaptive, BMCT-II and DAT Next Generation, which candidates take online and which are scored automatically against norm groups to produce percentile-based reports for hiring and development.
§ The record
Pin is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, TalentLens 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 TalentLens is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Pin | TalentLens |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2024 | Not recorded |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 50% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Pin 30 · TalentLens 52
4.4 weighted points to TalentLens
18% weight · 70% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Pin 35 · TalentLens 45
1.8 weighted points to TalentLens
12% weight · 88% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Pin 45 · TalentLens 32
1.6 weighted points to Pin
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Pin 50 · TalentLens 57
0.8 weighted points to TalentLens
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Pin 55 · TalentLens 58
0.2 weighted points to TalentLens
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -5.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.8 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 Pin minus TalentLens.
| Category | Weight | Pin | TalentLens | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 52 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 45 | -10 | -1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 30 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 50 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -0.8 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 32 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 58 | -3 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 46 (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 | Pin | TalentLens | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 32 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 24 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Pin has 37 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 32 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; TalentLens has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for TalentLens sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 66 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 37 for Pin, across 1 distinct source domain, and 29 for TalentLens, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Pin last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- TalentLens 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