§ The result
Ashby leads Test Partnership on all 7 criteria.
Under rubric v1.0, Ashby, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 56 and Test Partnership, filed under Assessment, on 50, 6 points apart. Ashby takes all 7 criteria from Test Partnership without a 20-point raw gap on any of them; the closest is Data Governance Disclosure, Ashby 58 to Test Partnership 57. The advantage Ashby holds is spread out: Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Ashby 62, Test Partnership 48, 18% weight), yet it supplies only 39% of the weighted points Ashby gains across the 7 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Test Partnership
Test Partnership publishes computer-adaptive aptitude tests, the TPAQ personality questionnaire and MindmetriQ game-based cognitive assessments. Employers review, rank and export the resulting norm-referenced percentile and sten scores in its dashboard, through its API or in integrated ATSs.
§ The record
Ashby is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Test Partnership under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Test Partnership is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Ashby | Test Partnership |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2018 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 39% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Ashby 62 · Test Partnership 48
2.5 weighted points to Ashby
20% weight · 58% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Ashby 63 · Test Partnership 57
1.2 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 75% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Ashby 42 · Test Partnership 33
1.1 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Ashby 42 · Test Partnership 36
0.9 weighted points to Ashby
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Ashby 62 · Test Partnership 58
0.5 weighted points to Ashby
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Ashby 58 · Test Partnership 57
0.1 weighted points to Ashby
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Ashby 63 · Test Partnership 62
0.1 weighted points to Ashby
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +6.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.4 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 +6.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Ashby minus Test Partnership.
| Category | Weight | Ashby | Test Partnership | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 63 | 57 | +6 | +1.2 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 62 | 48 | +14 | +2.5 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 42 | 36 | +6 | +0.9 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 58 | 57 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 62 | 58 | +4 | +0.5 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 42 | 33 | +9 | +1.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 63 | 62 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 56 (F) | 50 (F) | +6 | +6.4 |
§ 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 | Ashby | Test Partnership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 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 | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 16 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Ashby has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Test Partnership has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 54 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 22 for Ashby, across 1 distinct source domain, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Ashby last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Test Partnership 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