§ The result
Thomas International takes the total, Vincere takes more of the criteria.
Thomas International (Assessment) edges Vincere (ATS-integrated) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 48 to 44. Vincere leads more of the criteria than Thomas International — 3 to 2 — but Bias Audit Transparency, which Thomas International leads, carries 18% of the rubric, and the weighted sum still falls to Thomas International. One criterion, Bias Audit Transparency, is both the widest raw gap (Thomas International 43, Vincere 18) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 18% weight it makes up 94% of the weighted advantage Thomas International holds across the 2 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Vincere
Access Vincere Evo is a recruitment-agency CRM and ATS from The Access Group whose Copilot AI scores candidates against a job on a 1-5 star scale, ranks the closest matches from the agency database, and generates job ads, candidate summaries and screening chatbots.
§ The record
Thomas International is filed under Assessment AI, Vincere under ATS-integrated AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Thomas International is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Thomas International | Vincere |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | GB |
| Founded | 1981 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Thomas International 43 · Vincere 18
4.5 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Thomas International 33 · Vincere 38
0.8 weighted points to Vincere
12% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Thomas International 51 · Vincere 55
0.5 weighted points to Vincere
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Thomas International 57 · Vincere 55
0.3 weighted points to Thomas International
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Thomas International 54 · Vincere 55
0.2 weighted points to Vincere
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to +3.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.2 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 +3.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Thomas International minus Vincere.
| Category | Weight | Thomas International | Vincere | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 54 | 55 | -1 | -0.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 43 | 18 | +25 | +4.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 33 | 38 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 55 | +2 | +0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 51 | 55 | -4 | -0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 40 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 48 (F) | 44 (F) | +4 | +3.4 |
§ 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 | Thomas International | Vincere | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 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% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Vincere has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Vincere sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain, and 32 for Vincere, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Thomas International last reviewed
- July 17, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Vincere 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