§ The result
Wonderlic leads Cognisess by 13 points.
Rubric v1.0 scores the Assessment entries Wonderlic and Cognisess at 43 and 30, a gap of 13 points. Cognisess takes 1 of the 7 criteria, Data Governance Disclosure among them, against 6 for Wonderlic, whose share includes Article 11 Technical Documentation. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap (Cognisess 20, Wonderlic 48) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cognisess 25, Wonderlic 52), 39% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Cognisess
UK talent-analytics platform that scores candidates and employees with 50+ game-based and questionnaire assessments and weighted job-fit 'profilers', can auto-pass or auto-reject applicants against score thresholds, and runs recorded video interviews with optional DeepLearn video analytics.
Vendor profile
Wonderlic
Wonderlic Select (formerly WonScore) is a pre-employment assessment that combines cognitive ability, personality, and motivation tests to score and rank candidates for job fit.
§ The record
Cognisess and Wonderlic 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 | Cognisess | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cognisess 25 · Wonderlic 52
5.4 weighted points to Wonderlic
18% weight · 73% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cognisess 20 · Wonderlic 48
5.0 weighted points to Wonderlic
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cognisess 42 · Wonderlic 52
1.2 weighted points to Wonderlic
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cognisess 40 · Wonderlic 55
1.2 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cognisess 20 · Wonderlic 25
0.8 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cognisess 42 · Wonderlic 38
0.6 weighted points to Cognisess
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cognisess 32 · Wonderlic 33
0.1 weighted points to Wonderlic
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -13.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 14.3 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 -13.1.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cognisess minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Cognisess | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 25 | 52 | -27 | -5.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 48 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 20 | 25 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.6 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 32 | 33 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 30 (F) | 43 (F) | -13 | -13.1 |
§ 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 | Cognisess | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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% | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 21 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cognisess has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 21 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Cognisess sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 41 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Cognisess, across 5 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cognisess last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Wonderlic last reviewed
- June 7, 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