§ The result
4 points separate Sense and Plum.
Sense (Screening) edges Plum (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 58 to 54. Sense leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Post-Market Monitoring, while Plum leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Plum takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Plum 83 to Sense 72, 96% of the weighted advantage Plum holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Post-Market Monitoring, Plum 36 to Sense 52.
Vendor profile
Plum
Plum is a pre-employment talent assessment platform that uses a Five-Factor (Big Five) psychometric Discovery Survey and a Talent Match model to score and rank candidates on behavioral "durable skills" for role fit, hiring, and development.
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
Plum is filed under Assessment AI, Sense under Screening AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Plum is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Plum | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | CA | US |
| Founded | 2012 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 25% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Plum 83 · Sense 72
2.0 weighted points to Plum
12% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Plum 36 · Sense 52
1.9 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 68% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Plum 28 · Sense 38
1.5 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Plum 52 · Sense 64
1.4 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Plum 54 · Sense 58
0.6 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Plum 58 · Sense 60
0.4 weighted points to Sense
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Plum 63 · Sense 62
0.1 weighted points to Plum
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -3.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -3.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Plum minus Sense.
| Category | Weight | Plum | Sense | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 72 | +11 | +2.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 28 | 38 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 54 | 58 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 52 | 64 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 36 | 52 | -16 | -1.9 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 62 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 58 (F) | -4 | -3.8 |
§ 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 | Plum | Sense | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 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 | 1 | Audit reportSources 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% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 15 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Plum has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 with a source URL, 4 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 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 Plum, across 1 distinct source domain, and 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Plum 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