§ The result
2 points separate Mercer | Mettl and Feenyx.
Within the Assessment cohort, Mercer | Mettl edges Feenyx by 2 points under rubric v1.0, 42 to 40. The criteria split evenly, 3 each to Feenyx and Mercer | Mettl, with 1 level, and the weighted points on the side Mercer | Mettl holds, headed by Bias Audit Transparency, settle the total. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Feenyx 25, Mercer | Mettl 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 72% of the weighted advantage Mercer | Mettl holds across the 3 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Feenyx
Feenyx (formerly Filtered.ai) is a skills-assessment and interview platform that runs AI-scored asynchronous coding, video and written assessments and AI-assisted live interviews, with resume scoring, candidate matching, identity verification and fraud/AI-use detection.
Vendor profile
Mercer | Mettl
Mercer | Mettl is an online talent assessment and remote-proctoring platform offering psychometric, aptitude, coding, and skills tests plus AI-assisted exam proctoring and scoring for hiring, certification, and L&D.
§ The record
Feenyx and Mercer | Mettl are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 2 secondary categories: Screening and Video interview.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Feenyx | Mercer | Mettl |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | IN |
| Founded | 2016 | 2010 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 45% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Feenyx 25 · Mercer | Mettl 42
3.1 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
12% weight · 67% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Feenyx 58 · Mercer | Mettl 45
1.6 weighted points to Feenyx
20% weight · 79% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Feenyx 42 · Mercer | Mettl 38
0.8 weighted points to Feenyx
15% weight · 90% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Feenyx 50 · Mercer | Mettl 55
0.8 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Feenyx 25 · Mercer | Mettl 28
0.4 weighted points to Mercer | Mettl
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Feenyx 55 · Mercer | Mettl 52
0.2 weighted points to Feenyx
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -1.7 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 6.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -2 beside that -1.7.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Feenyx minus Mercer | Mettl.
| Category | Weight | Feenyx | Mercer | Mettl | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 42 | 38 | +4 | +0.8 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 25 | 42 | -17 | -3.1 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 25 | 28 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 50 | 55 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 45 | +13 | +1.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 38 | 38 | - | - |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 55 | 52 | +3 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 40 (F) | 42 (F) | -2 | -1.7 |
§ 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 | Feenyx | Mercer | Mettl | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 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% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 0 | 1 | — |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | — |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 8 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 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% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 30 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 9 | 5 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Feenyx has 35 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 30 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Mercer | Mettl has 14 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 9 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Feenyx sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 49 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 35 for Feenyx, across 3 distinct source domains, and 14 for Mercer | Mettl, across 2 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Feenyx last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Mercer | Mettl 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