§ The result
Tenzo AI leads Thomas International by 8 points.
Under rubric v1.0, Tenzo AI, filed under Screening, finishes on 56 and Thomas International, filed under Assessment, on 48, 8 points apart. Thomas International takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Article 11 Technical Documentation among them, against 5 for Tenzo AI, whose share includes Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Tenzo AI 83, Thomas International 43 — and at an 18% weight it carries 71% of the weighted advantage Tenzo AI holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Tenzo AI
Tenzo AI's AI recruiter, Morgan, screens and interviews applicants by phone, SMS, email, WhatsApp or video in 40+ languages, scores them against employer-defined rubrics with fraud and identity checks, schedules next rounds, and writes scores, transcripts and recordings back to the customer's ATS.
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
Tenzo AI 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 | Tenzo AI | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2024 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 59% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Tenzo AI 83 · Thomas International 43
7.2 weighted points to Tenzo AI
20% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Tenzo AI 45 · Thomas International 54
1.8 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Tenzo AI 60 · Thomas International 51
1.1 weighted points to Tenzo AI
15% weight · 91% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Tenzo AI 40 · Thomas International 33
1.1 weighted points to Tenzo AI
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Tenzo AI 45 · Thomas International 40
0.6 weighted points to Tenzo AI
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Tenzo AI 55 · Thomas International 57
0.3 weighted points to Thomas International
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Tenzo AI 62 · Thomas International 60
0.2 weighted points to Tenzo AI
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +8.0 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +8 beside that +8.0.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Tenzo AI minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Tenzo AI | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 45 | 54 | -9 | -1.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 83 | 43 | +40 | +7.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 60 | 51 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 40 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 48 (F) | +8 | +8.0 |
§ 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 | Tenzo AI | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 4 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate 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% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own 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% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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% | 30 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Tenzo AI has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 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 Tenzo AI sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 51 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Tenzo AI, across 2 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Tenzo AI 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