§ The result
Wonderlic leads Entelo by 10 points.
Wonderlic sits 10 points above Entelo under rubric v1.0 — 43 against 33 — with Wonderlic filed under Assessment and Entelo under Sourcing. Wonderlic leads 4 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Entelo leads 2, including Data Governance Disclosure, and 1 is level. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Entelo 20, Wonderlic 48 — and at an 18% weight it carries 43% of the weighted advantage Wonderlic holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Entelo
Entelo is an AI-powered talent sourcing and diversity-recruiting platform that aggregates hundreds of millions of public candidate profiles and applies predictive machine-learning models to score, rank, and surface (including underrepresented) candidates for recruiters.
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
Entelo is filed under Candidate sourcing AI, Wonderlic under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act, NYC LL 144 and Illinois HB 3773. Only Wonderlic is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Entelo | Wonderlic |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2011 | 1937 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 38% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Entelo 20 · Wonderlic 48
5.0 weighted points to Wonderlic
20% weight · 72% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Entelo 30 · Wonderlic 52
4.4 weighted points to Wonderlic
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Entelo 42 · Wonderlic 52
1.2 weighted points to Wonderlic
8% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Entelo 40 · Wonderlic 55
1.2 weighted points to Wonderlic
15% weight · 98% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Entelo 45 · Wonderlic 38
1.1 weighted points to Entelo
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Entelo 35 · Wonderlic 33
0.2 weighted points to Entelo
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -10.5 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -10 beside that -10.5.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Entelo minus Wonderlic.
| Category | Weight | Entelo | Wonderlic | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 30 | 52 | -22 | -4.4 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 48 | -28 | -5.0 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 25 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 45 | 38 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 42 | 52 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 35 | 33 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 40 | 55 | -15 | -1.2 |
| Total | 100% | 33 (F) | 43 (F) | -10 | -10.5 |
§ 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 | Entelo | Wonderlic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 1 | 1 | — | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 2 | 2 | — | 1 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 0 | 1 | — | 0 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 1 | 1 | — | 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% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 9 | 8 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 9 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Entelo has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 8 documented absences; Wonderlic has 15 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 31 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 16 for Entelo, across 3 distinct source domains, and 15 for Wonderlic, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Entelo 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.
§ Where next