§ The result
Thomas International leads Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria.
Thomas International sits 13 points above Aon Assessment under rubric v1.0, 48 against 35, with both filed under Assessment. Thomas International is ahead of Aon Assessment on all 7 criteria but on none of them by as much as 20 raw points, the closest being Human Oversight Design at Aon Assessment 45 to Thomas International 51. Data Governance Disclosure is the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing at once (Aon Assessment 38, Thomas International 57, 15% weight), but it accounts for only 22% of the weighted advantage Thomas International 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
Thomas International
Thomas International provides psychometric and aptitude assessments (behaviour/DISC, cognitive ability, personality and emotional intelligence) with an AI coaching layer, used for hiring, candidate selection and employee development.
§ The record
Aon Assessment and Thomas International are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: 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 | Thomas International |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Mid |
| Headquarters | DE | GB |
| Founded | 2002 | 1981 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
15% weight · 22% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Aon Assessment 38 · Thomas International 57
2.9 weighted points to Thomas International
20% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Aon Assessment 40 · Thomas International 54
2.8 weighted points to Thomas International
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Aon Assessment 30 · Thomas International 43
2.3 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 77% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Aon Assessment 25 · Thomas International 40
1.8 weighted points to Thomas International
15% weight · 87% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Aon Assessment 25 · Thomas International 33
1.2 weighted points to Thomas International
8% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Aon Assessment 48 · Thomas International 60
1.0 weighted points to Thomas International
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Aon Assessment 45 · Thomas International 51
0.7 weighted points to Thomas International
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -12.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -13 beside that -12.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Aon Assessment minus Thomas International.
| Category | Weight | Aon Assessment | Thomas International | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 40 | 54 | -14 | -2.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 43 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 33 | -8 | -1.2 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 38 | 57 | -19 | -2.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 45 | 51 | -6 | -0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 25 | 40 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 60 | -12 | -1.0 |
| Total | 100% | 35 (F) | 48 (F) | -13 | -12.7 |
§ 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 | Thomas International | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 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 | 11 | 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; Thomas International has 17 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 11 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 34 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 17 for Aon Assessment, across 3 distinct source domains, and 17 for Thomas International, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Aon Assessment last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Thomas International last reviewed
- July 17, 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