HomeCompareCornerstone OnDemand vs Wonderlic

Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0

Cornerstone OnDemand vs Wonderlic

Export comparison (CSV)Pro

§ The result

Cornerstone OnDemand leads Wonderlic on all 7 criteria.

Cornerstone OnDemand sits 13 points above Wonderlic under rubric v1.0 — 56 against 43 — with Cornerstone OnDemand filed under ATS-integrated and Wonderlic under Assessment. Cornerstone OnDemand leads every one of the 7 criteria, Wonderlic none of them, and the closest of the 7 is Human Oversight Design, Cornerstone OnDemand 55 to Wonderlic 52. The widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing fall on different criteria: Data Governance Disclosure (Cornerstone OnDemand 60, Wonderlic 38) and Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Cornerstone OnDemand 72, Wonderlic 52), the second being 31% of the weighted advantage Cornerstone OnDemand holds across the 7 criteria on that side of the table.

§ The record

Cornerstone OnDemand is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.

Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.

RecordCornerstone OnDemandWonderlic
Price tierEnterpriseMid
HeadquartersUSUS
Founded19991937

§ What decides it

The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.

  1. 20% weight · 31% of the movement so far

    Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Cornerstone OnDemand 72 · Wonderlic 52

    4.0 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  2. 15% weight · 57% of the movement so far

    Data Governance Disclosure

    Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Wonderlic 38

    3.3 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  3. 18% weight · 71% of the movement so far

    Bias Audit Transparency

    Cornerstone OnDemand 58 · Wonderlic 48

    1.8 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  4. 15% weight · 83% of the movement so far

    FRIA Support

    Cornerstone OnDemand 35 · Wonderlic 25

    1.5 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  5. 12% weight · 94% of the movement so far

    Post-Market Monitoring

    Cornerstone OnDemand 45 · Wonderlic 33

    1.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  6. 8% weight · 97% of the movement so far

    Customer Documentation

    Cornerstone OnDemand 60 · Wonderlic 55

    0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

  7. 12% weight · 100% of the movement so far

    Human Oversight Design

    Cornerstone OnDemand 55 · Wonderlic 52

    0.4 weighted points to Cornerstone OnDemand

Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +12.8 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 12.8 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 +12.8.

§ Category-by-category

Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.

Δ is Cornerstone OnDemand minus Wonderlic.

CategoryWeightCornerstone OnDemandWonderlicΔ rawΔ weighted
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%7252+20+4.0
Bias Audit Transparency18%5848+10+1.8
FRIA Support15%3525+10+1.5
Data Governance Disclosure15%6038+22+3.3
Human Oversight Design12%5552+3+0.4
Post-Market Monitoring12%4533+12+1.4
Customer Documentation8%6055+5+0.4
Total100%56 (F)43 (F)+13+12.8

§ 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.

CriterionWeightCornerstone OnDemandWonderlic
CitedAbsencesAudit / hostingCitedAbsencesAudit / hosting
Article 11 Technical Documentation20%30Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
Bias Audit Transparency18%21Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain11
FRIA Support15%11Sources on the vendor's own domain01
Data Governance Disclosure15%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Human Oversight Design12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain20Sources on the vendor's own domain
Post-Market Monitoring12%21Sources on the vendor's own domain11Sources on the vendor's own domain
Customer Documentation8%30Sources on the vendor's own domain21Sources on the vendor's own domain
All criteria100%155Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain96Sources on the vendor's own domain

Cornerstone OnDemand has 20 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 15 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 Cornerstone OnDemand sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.

Provenance

The scores above are documented by 35 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 20 for Cornerstone OnDemand, across 2 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.

Rubric
v1.0
Cornerstone OnDemand last reviewed
June 7, 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.