§ The result
Sense leads Versant by Pearson by 9 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Sense, filed under Screening, finishes on 58 and Versant by Pearson, filed under Assessment, on 49, 9 points apart. Versant by Pearson takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 6 for Sense, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Sense 72, Versant by Pearson 42 — 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
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.
Vendor profile
Versant by Pearson
Versant by Pearson is a suite of AI-scored English proficiency tests (plus spoken Spanish, French, Arabic and Dutch) that automatically score candidates' spoken and written responses on Pearson's Global Scale of English within minutes, used by employers such as contact centres and BPOs to screen applicants and benchmark staff through the ScoreKeeper dashboard.
§ The record
Sense is filed under Screening AI, Versant by Pearson under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Versant by Pearson is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Sense | Versant by Pearson |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2016 | 1844 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 54% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Sense 72 · Versant by Pearson 42
5.4 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 66% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Sense 38 · Versant by Pearson 30
1.2 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 76% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Sense 52 · Versant by Pearson 43
1.1 weighted points to Sense
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Sense 64 · Versant by Pearson 56
1.0 weighted points to Sense
15% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Sense 58 · Versant by Pearson 53
0.8 weighted points to Sense
20% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Sense 60 · Versant by Pearson 63
0.6 weighted points to Versant by Pearson
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Sense 62 · Versant by Pearson 61
0.1 weighted points to Sense
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 10.1 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 +8.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Sense minus Versant by Pearson.
| Category | Weight | Sense | Versant by Pearson | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 60 | 63 | -3 | -0.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 72 | 42 | +30 | +5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 38 | 30 | +8 | +1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 53 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 64 | 56 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 52 | 43 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 61 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 58 (F) | 49 (F) | +9 | +8.9 |
§ 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 | Sense | Versant by Pearson | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 3 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 23 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Sense has 19 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 3 documented absences; Versant by Pearson has 29 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 23 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Sense and Versant by Pearson sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 19 for Sense, across 2 distinct source domains, and 29 for Versant by Pearson, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Sense last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Versant by Pearson 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