§ The result
1 point separates Recruiterflow and Aon Assessment.
Recruiterflow holds a 1-point edge over Aon Assessment under rubric v1.0, 36 to 35, across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Recruiterflow leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Human Oversight Design, while Aon Assessment leads 2, including Bias Audit Transparency. The heaviest weighted swing runs the other way — Aon Assessment takes Bias Audit Transparency at 18%, Aon Assessment 30 to Recruiterflow 18, 61% of the weighted advantage Aon Assessment holds — while the widest raw gap sits on Human Oversight Design, Aon Assessment 45 to Recruiterflow 58.
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
Recruiterflow
Recruiterflow is an ATS and CRM for recruiting agencies and executive search firms. Its AIRA AI layer ranks candidates already in a firm's database against each job with an explainable 0–100 Criteria Score (AIRA Matchmaker, shown as the 'AI Matches' card), and adds natural-language candidate search, external profile sourcing and an AI call notetaker that fills in interview scorecards.
§ The record
Aon Assessment is filed under Assessment AI, Recruiterflow under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Aon Assessment is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Aon Assessment | Recruiterflow |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | US |
| Founded | 2002 | 2017 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 26% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Recruiterflow 18
2.2 weighted points to Aon Assessment
12% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Recruiterflow 58
1.6 weighted points to Recruiterflow
20% weight · 61% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Recruiterflow 33
1.4 weighted points to Aon Assessment
12% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Recruiterflow 33
1.0 weighted points to Recruiterflow
15% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Recruiterflow 44
0.9 weighted points to Recruiterflow
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Recruiterflow 30
0.8 weighted points to Recruiterflow
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Recruiterflow 56
0.6 weighted points to Recruiterflow
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -1.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.4 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -1 beside that -1.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Recruiterflow.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Recruiterflow | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 33 | +7 | +1.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 18 | +12 | +2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 30 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 44 | -6 | -0.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 58 | -13 | -1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 33 | -8 | -1.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 56 | -8 | -0.6 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 36 (F) | -1 | -1.2 |
§ 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 | Recruiterflow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 1 | 1 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain | 3 | 1 | Sources 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 | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 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 | 25 | 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; Recruiterflow has 31 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 25 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 48 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 31 for Recruiterflow, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Recruiterflow 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