§ The result
Ashby leads Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria.
Ashby finishes 21 points clear of Aon Assessment under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 35 — across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Ashby leads every one of the 7 criteria and 3 of them by 20 raw points or more, Bias Audit Transparency among them; Aon Assessment leads none. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Aon Assessment 30, Ashby 62, 18% weight), but it accounts for only 27% of the weighted advantage Ashby holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Aon Assessment
Aon Assessment Solutions (formerly cut-e) provides enterprise pre-hire psychometric assessments - ability, personality (ADEPT-15), situational-judgement, gamified cognitive (smartPredict/gridChallenge) tests and an AI-scored video interview tool (vidAssess-AI) - used to screen and rank job applicants at scale.
Vendor profile
Ashby
Ashby is an all-in-one recruiting platform combining applicant tracking, CRM/sourcing, scheduling, and analytics, with embedded AI features including resume-to-criteria evaluation, AI-assisted application review, sourcing outreach, and scheduling agents.
§ The record
Aon Assessment is filed under Assessment AI, Ashby 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 Aon Assessment is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Aon Assessment | Ashby |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2002 | 2018 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Ashby 62
5.8 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 49% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Ashby 63
4.6 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Ashby 58
3.0 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 75% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Ashby 42
2.5 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 85% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Ashby 62
2.0 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Ashby 42
2.0 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Ashby 63
1.2 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -21.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 21.2 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -21 beside that -21.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Ashby.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Ashby | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 63 | -23 | -4.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 62 | -32 | -5.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -2.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 62 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 63 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 56 (F) | -21 | -21.2 |
§ 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 | Aon Assessment | Ashby | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | 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 | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 11 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Aon Assessment has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Aon Assessment sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 39 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 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