← Trust Directory

Relevance AI

relevanceai.com · 1 assessment

Relevance AI - organisation
Security review required
1 blocking issue to resolve before signing
Assessed Oct 21, 2026 · public evidence coverage 45% · evidence confidence medium · methodology 0.7.1

Certifications

What the vendor claims, and how far each claim has been independently corroborated. A claim is only ever as strong as the rung it reaches.

ISO/IEC 42001
Not claimed

Not claimed in any public source scanned. This is the AI-management-system certification — in its absence, the vendor’s AI governance rests on its general security and privacy certifications.

  • — Vendor claimed
  • — Evidence cited
  • — Registry corroborated
  • — Scope verified
  • — Current

Supply chain

Third parties this vendor’s AI depends on, as disclosed in its own public material. Responsibility transfers; accountability doesn’t.

AI providers: Google (Gemini 3.5 Flash), Anthropic (Claude Opus 4.6), OpenAI (GPT Image 1.5), Exa (people-search index)
Infrastructure: AWS Bedrock (customer's own account, BYO Anthropic models), Unnamed cloud infrastructure (IaaS) provider
Subprocessors: Google Analytics

How to read this

This assessment is automated and point-in-time, built only from evidence the vendor publishes publicly plus checks against official certification registries. It is not an audit, not a certification, and not an endorsement. A low score means public evidence was thin or uncorroborated - which is a finding about disclosure, not proof of a weak control environment. Where too little was found to characterise a product at all, no score or grade is published rather than a low one: absence of evidence is not a number, and a letter grade would read as a verdict on the vendor when it would only be a verdict on what we could collect. This record reflects the evidence available on Oct 21, 2026.