§ The result
Jack & Jill leads Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria.
Jack & Jill, filed under Sourcing, comes out 14 points above Aon Assessment, filed under Assessment: 49 against 35 under rubric v1.0. Of the 7 criteria Aon Assessment wins none, and the narrowest lead Jack & Jill holds is on FRIA Support, Aon Assessment 25 to Jack & Jill 28. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Aon Assessment 30, Jack & Jill 62 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Jack & Jill 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
Jack & Jill
Jack & Jill is a London AI recruiting marketplace. Its free career agent, Jack, interviews and profiles candidates, and its employer-side AI recruiter, Jill, turns a role brief into a scoring rubric, ranks candidates from Jack's network (and optionally public profiles) with a percentage match, and arranges introductions only when both sides agree.
§ The record
Aon Assessment is filed under Assessment AI, Jack & Jill under Candidate sourcing 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 | Jack & Jill |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | GB |
| Founded | 2002 | 2025 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 43% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Jack & Jill 62
5.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Jack & Jill 48
2.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Jack & Jill 58
1.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Jack & Jill 48
1.5 weighted points to Jack & Jill
20% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Jack & Jill 44
0.8 weighted points to Jack & Jill
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Jack & Jill 56
0.6 weighted points to Jack & Jill
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Jack & Jill 28
0.4 weighted points to Jack & Jill
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.5 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -14 beside that -13.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Jack & Jill.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Jack & Jill | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 44 | -4 | -0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 62 | -32 | -5.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 48 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 48 | -23 | -2.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 56 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 49 (F) | -14 | -13.5 |
§ 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 | Jack & Jill | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 6 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 8 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate 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 | 31 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Aon Assessment has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Jack & Jill has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 31 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Aon Assessment and Jack & Jill sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 53 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 36 for Jack & Jill, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Jack & Jill 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