§ The result
Radancy leads Aon Assessment by 6 points.
Radancy scores 41 and Aon Assessment 35 under rubric v1.0, a 6-point gap across the Sourcing and Assessment cohorts. Radancy leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Aon Assessment leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Data Governance Disclosure is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Aon Assessment 38, Radancy 58 — and at a 15% weight it carries 40% of the weighted advantage Radancy holds across the 6 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
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
Aon Assessment is filed under Assessment AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Video interview and Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Aon Assessment | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2002 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Radancy 58
3.0 weighted points to Radancy
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Radancy 20
1.8 weighted points to Aon Assessment
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Radancy 57
1.4 weighted points to Radancy
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Radancy 36
1.3 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 91% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Radancy 60
1.0 weighted points to Radancy
15% weight · 96% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Radancy 28
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
20% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Radancy 42
0.4 weighted points to Radancy
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -5.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -6 beside that -5.8.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 42 | -2 | -0.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 20 | +10 | +1.8 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 58 | -20 | -3.0 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 57 | -12 | -1.4 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 36 | -11 | -1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 41 (F) | -6 | -5.8 |
§ 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 | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | 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 | Sources 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; Radancy 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 Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy last reviewed
- August 2, 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