Side-by-side · Rubric v1.0
Emmersion vs Wonderlic
Emmersion
Emmersion, Rosetta Stone's assessment division within IXL Learning, sells AI-scored adaptive TrueNorth speaking and writing tests and WebCAPE reading and grammar exams. They rate language proficiency on a 0-10 scale mapped to CEFR and ACTFL and are used for pre-employment screening, checking employees' language skills and placing students.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
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.
Substantial gaps
Assessment
The result
1 point separates Emmersion and Wonderlic.
Within the Assessment cohort, Emmersion edges Wonderlic by 1 point under rubric v1.0, 44 to 43. Emmersion leads 6 of the 7 criteria, including Data Governance Disclosure, while Wonderlic leads 1, including Bias Audit Transparency. Bias Audit Transparency is at once the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing, and it belongs to Wonderlic — Emmersion 28, Wonderlic 48, on an 18% weight — which is 100% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 1 criterion on that side of the table.
Criteria won
7 criteria
- Emmersion6
- Wonderlic1
- Widest raw gap
- Bias Audit Transparency28 vs 48
- Heaviest weighted swing
- Bias Audit Transparency18% weight
Keep this comparison
Both scores and all 7 criteria, side by side, in your inbox.
The record
Categories, scope and company facts.
Emmersion and Wonderlic are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of
| Record | Emmersion | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 1937 |
What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
- 1
Bias Audit Transparency
18% weight44% of the movement so far
Emmersion28Wonderlic483.6 weighted points to Wonderlic
- 2
Data Governance Disclosure
15% weight65% of the movement so far
Emmersion50Wonderlic381.8 weighted points to Emmersion
- 3
Article 11 Technical Documentation
20% weight77% of the movement so far
Emmersion57Wonderlic521.0 weighted points to Emmersion
- 4
FRIA Support
15% weight86% of the movement so far
Emmersion30Wonderlic250.8 weighted points to Emmersion
- 5
Post-Market Monitoring
12% weight94% of the movement so far
Emmersion38Wonderlic330.6 weighted points to Emmersion
- 6
Customer Documentation
8% weight99% of the movement so far
Emmersion60Wonderlic550.4 weighted points to Emmersion
- 7
Human Oversight Design
12% weight100% of the movement so far
Emmersion53Wonderlic520.1 weighted points to Emmersion
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +1.1 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 8.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +1 beside that +1.1.
Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Emmersion minus Wonderlic, coloured for whichever of the two it favours.
| Category | Weight | Emmersion | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 57 | 52 | +5 | +1.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 28 | 48 | -20 | -3.6 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 25 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 38 | +12 | +1.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 53 | 52 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 33 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 55 | +5 | +0.4 |
| Total | 100% | 44F | 43F | +1 | +1.1 |
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 | Emmersion | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 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% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 35 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Emmersion has 40 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 35 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 Emmersion sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 55 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 40 for Emmersion, across 5 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Emmersion 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.