§ The result
Thomas International leads Ribbon by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Thomas International, filed under Assessment, finishes on 48 and Ribbon, filed under Screening, on 43, 5 points apart. Ribbon takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 5 for Thomas International, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Ribbon 42, Thomas International 54 — and at a 20% weight it carries 49% of the weighted advantage Thomas International holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Ribbon
Ribbon is an AI recruiter that runs voice and video screening interviews with applicants around the clock, scores each interview against default and custom rubrics, ranks candidates for recruiter review, and syncs the results to 60+ applicant tracking systems.
Vendor profile
Thomas International
Thomas International provides psychometric and aptitude assessments (behaviour/DISC, cognitive ability, personality and emotional intelligence) with an AI coaching layer, used for hiring, candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Ribbon is filed under Screening AI, Thomas International under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ribbon | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Low | Mid |
| Headquarters | CA | GB |
| Founded | 2020 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ribbon 42 · Thomas International 54
2.4 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ribbon 50 · Thomas International 57
1.1 weighted points to Thomas International
18% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ribbon 38 · Thomas International 43
0.9 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ribbon 55 · Thomas International 51
0.5 weighted points to Ribbon
12% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ribbon 37 · Thomas International 40
0.4 weighted points to Thomas International
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ribbon 58 · Thomas International 60
0.2 weighted points to Thomas International
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -4.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -5 beside that -4.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ribbon minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Ribbon | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 54 | -12 | -2.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 43 | -5 | -0.9 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 33 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 57 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 51 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 37 | 40 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 58 | 60 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 43 (F) | 48 (F) | -5 | -4.4 |
§ 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 | Ribbon | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 31 | 4 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Ribbon has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Ribbon sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 52 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Ribbon, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ribbon last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Thomas International last reviewed
- July 17, 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