§ The result
Test Partnership leads Emi by 17 points.
Test Partnership finishes 17 points clear of Emi under rubric v1.0 — 50 against 33 — across the Assessment and Screening cohorts. The 7 criteria split 6 to 1 in favour of Test Partnership: Test Partnership is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Emi on Post-Market Monitoring. Bias Audit Transparency is the widest raw gap (Emi 18, Test Partnership 48) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Emi 28, Test Partnership 57), 33% of the weighted advantage Test Partnership builds across the 6 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Emi
Emi runs AI agents on WhatsApp, SMS and Messenger that screen and score frontline job applicants against employer-set criteria, schedule interviews, and collect hiring documents and check them against Mexican government databases.
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
Emi is filed under Screening AI, Test Partnership under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
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 | Emi | Test Partnership |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | AR | GB |
| Founded | 2017 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 33% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Emi 28 · Test Partnership 57
5.8 weighted points to Test Partnership
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Emi 18 · Test Partnership 48
5.4 weighted points to Test Partnership
15% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Emi 44 · Test Partnership 57
1.9 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 83% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Emi 44 · Test Partnership 58
1.7 weighted points to Test Partnership
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Emi 25 · Test Partnership 36
1.6 weighted points to Test Partnership
8% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Emi 48 · Test Partnership 62
1.1 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Emi 35 · Test Partnership 33
0.2 weighted points to Emi
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -17.4 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 17.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -17 beside that -17.4.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emi minus Test Partnership.
| Category | Weight | Emi | Test Partnership | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 28 | 57 | -29 | -5.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 18 | 48 | -30 | -5.4 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 36 | -11 | -1.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 44 | 57 | -13 | -1.9 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 44 | 58 | -14 | -1.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 48 | 62 | -14 | -1.1 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 50 (F) | -17 | -17.4 |
§ 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 | Emi | Test Partnership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 1 | — | 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% | 5 | 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% | 3 | 1 | 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 a separate 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% | 19 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 26 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Emi has 26 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 19 with a source URL, 7 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 Emi and Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 26 for Emi, across 3 distinct source domains, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emi last reviewed
- September 25, 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