Introduction: Requirements traceability recovery is commonly evaluated as a single ranking task, although practical review settings differ in the evidence available before review, the inspection budget, and the possibility of analyst feedback. We present TraceRank, a configurable review-support framework that makes recovery assumptions explicit and enables only the recovery modes that are valid for the available evidence and review process. Methods: TraceRank separates cold-start recovery, partial-trace recovery, selective validation, fixed-budget review, and interactive feedback. It organizes retrieval, semantic-structural, dependency, hypergraph, validated-link, and feedback evidence within a common recovery pipeline. We evaluate TraceRank on five traceability datasets: eTour, iTrust, SMOS, eANCI, and LibEST. Results: In the cold-start setting, the best retained configuration recovers 404 of 501 true links at Top-30 (LinkRecall@30 = 80.6%) and completes 33 of 60 held-out requirements. Under the partial-trace assumption, the Validated Trace Responsibility Graph (VTRG) recovers 465 links (92.8%), completes 43 requirements, and reduces severe misses to 12. Across the same five requirement-level split seeds used for the split-robustness analysis, VTRG achieves mean LinkRecall@30 of 91.3% (SD 4.0%) and mean CompleteRate@30 of 76.5% (SD 8.1%). Archived fixed-budget and simulated-feedback outputs are retained only as exploratory review-process sensitivity evidence because the originating row-level priority queue and sequential update history are not preserved in the clean archive; they are therefore not treated as confirmatory evidence in the primary conclusions. Discussion: The results support a configuration-aware interpretation of trace recovery: cold-start, partial-trace, fixed-budget, and feedback-based recovery are different operating settings and should not be interpreted as one universal static ranking problem.